Subject: Re: [RPSEC] issue: operator use

From: Sandy Murphy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:56:19 -0500 (EST)

>It is really not an attack if you think about it.  It is just managing my
>traffic.  IMHO each "cluster" of like AS numbers should be considered to be
>one instance of an AS for the purposes of security.  This seems to be a
>reasonable assumption to make.

This may not be an attack if you do it to manage your traffic - but could
someone of unpure motives use the same sort of path manipulation to
cause problems?  Is there a way to limit the sort of manipulations to
those that are non-risky?

What do you mean by "like AS numbers"?  You were speaking of appending
your peer's AS on the AS_PATH you advertise.  In what way is your peer's
AS a "like AS"?

--Sandy

_______________________________________________
RPSEC mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec

---

From: Sandy Murphy <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 08:20:48 -0500 (EST)

> I dont think the spec is the right place to regulate it tho, there are reasons
>why someone might prepend an asn other than the one the bgp process is running
>under that is not the asn of another company's network

I can't tell if you are saying that you might prepend an ASN that no
other company is using or that you might prepend an ASN that belongs
to your company but just doesn't happen to be the ASN under which the
BGP process is running (i.e., you have more than one).

--Sandy