nanog mailing list archives
Re: Route leak in Bangladesh
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 08:25:06 +0200
On 30/Jun/15 17:09, Job Snijders wrote:
If you are a network providing transit to the leak originator mentioned in the above paragraph, I believe a prefix based filter could have made a big difference.
And therein lies the secret sauce. Given that we've had an incident like this twice in the past month, I'm seriously concerned about the network operations of "top-tier" providers. Mark.
Current thread:
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Mark Tinka (Jun 30)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Mark Tinka (Jun 30)
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Mark Tinka (Jun 30)
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Jared Mauch (Jul 01)
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Mark Tinka (Jul 01)
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Nick Hilliard (Jul 01)
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Mark Tinka (Jul 01)
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Nick Hilliard (Jul 01)
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Mike Hammett (Jul 01)
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Mark Tinka (Jul 01)
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Hugo Slabbert (Jul 02)
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Mark Tinka (Jul 02)
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Jared Mauch (Jul 01)
- Re: Route leak in Bangladesh Jared Mauch (Jul 01)
