nanog mailing list archives
Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU
From: bmanning () ISI EDU
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 11:10:50 -0700 (PDT)
On Wed, 8 Oct 1997, Michael Dillon wrote: And networks that 1) do prefix filtering of peers, or 2) have the satanic phylters in place didn't even notice yesterday's snafu. -dorian
Unless you were in the select list of prefixes that UUnet "borrowed" and were trying to talk to UUnet downstreams. --bill
Current thread:
- UUNet Routing SNAFU prue (Oct 07)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU Michael Dillon (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU Dorian R. Kim (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU bmanning (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU Steve Meuse (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU Dorian R. Kim (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU Matt Ranney (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU Michael Dillon (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU Randy Bush (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU blast (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU blast (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU Phil Howard (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU Alec H. Peterson (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU Dorian R. Kim (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU Michael Dillon (Oct 08)
- Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU Miquel van Smoorenburg (Oct 09)
