nanog mailing list archives
Question about the use of NO_EXPORT in BGP route announcements
From: "Sriram, Kotikalapudi \(Fed\) via NANOG" <nanog () nanog org>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2024 17:26:08 +0000
For some IETF work in progress related to Source Address Validation (SAV), it is useful to know the purposes for which NO_EXPORT may be attached to routes announced in BGP, especially towards transit providers? I know it makes sense for an AS to announce an aggregate less-specific prefix to transit providers and peers without NO_EXPORT while announcing some more-specific prefixes (subsumed under the aggregate) with NO_EXPORT towards customer ASes. But are there good reasons when an AS might announce a prefix (route) to a transit provider with NO_EXPORT attached? The IP address space in consideration here is meant to have global reachability. Sriram
Current thread:
- Question about the use of NO_EXPORT in BGP route announcements Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) via NANOG (Sep 19)
- Re: Question about the use of NO_EXPORT in BGP route announcements 7riw77 () gmail com (Sep 19)
- Re: Question about the use of NO_EXPORT in BGP route announcements Mark Tinka (Sep 20)
- Re: Question about the use of NO_EXPORT in BGP route announcements Justin Krejci (Sep 20)
- Re: Question about the use of NO_EXPORT in BGP route announcements Tarko Tikan (Sep 20)
- Re: Question about the use of NO_EXPORT in BGP route announcements Elmar K. Bins (Sep 20)
- Re: Question about the use of NO_EXPORT in BGP route announcements Tarko Tikan (Sep 20)
- Re: Question about the use of NO_EXPORT in BGP route announcements sronan (Sep 20)
- Re: Question about the use of NO_EXPORT in BGP route announcements Warren Kumari (Sep 20)
- Re: Question about the use of NO_EXPORT in BGP route announcements Ben Cartwright-Cox via NANOG (Sep 24)
- Re: Question about the use of NO_EXPORT in BGP route announcements Job Snijders via NANOG (Sep 24)
- Re: Question about the use of NO_EXPORT in BGP route announcements Elmar K. Bins (Sep 20)
