Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: withdrawal propagation (was E.E. Times?)
From: randy () psg com (Randy Bush)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 97 09:15 PST

An implementation that propagates _extra_ withdrawals shouldn't _hide_
behind "standards compliant".  In fact, I don't think _is_ either
"valid" or "standards compliant".  There is no standard that says "send
extra BGP withdrawals for routes that you are not currently announcing".
It was just a bug in the implementation.

Nice to know you understand the cause well enough to assign blame.  Mind
telling us all what it is?

randy
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]