Evening all. Sorry for the late reply, this got hung up in pine limbo land when the cablers plugged their vacuum cleaner into the UPS and everything went "pop" :-(. On Fri, 18 Aug 2000, Joe Abley wrote:
The reason that route servers first came into existence was to make it easier to perform aggressive route filtering without each exhange partitipant needing to re-invent the wheel (you know the route servers filter strictly, so you can trust them without filtering and save yourself effort).
A route server without an aggressive filtering policy is a much less useful tool.
Suits me. I currently have a subset of routes that I trust, and filter aggressively for, and another bunch that I readvertise that I don't have any control over. At the moment, both sets get advertised to all peers, with no differentiation, but there's no reason why I can't change that (either for specific peers, or globally), such that the only routes I announce are the routes I trust. The real question is whether the operator community think that's a good idea, and if they trust Citylink (me) to do so. I'd have thought that for an exchange now numbering ~20 possible public ASN peers, it is worthwhile. Cheers Si --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog