[bdNOG] Fwd: Route leak in Bangladesh

Thu Jul 2 00:32:48 BDT 2015

Dear Rana Bhai,

Please try checking from looking glass or route server for the particular
prefix. Sometime your upstream might aggregate the prefix and announce a
larger block towards their upstreams which might ignore your preference
such as AS Path prepend. Also, sometimes your upstream might apply their
own policy which might contradict with your intentions. From looking
glass/route server output you will definitely get an overall idea about it.

It will also help if you can talk to your upstream and share the case.

BR//Awal

On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Md. Anamul Haque Rana <
rana.anamul at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I configured eBGP in my border router. I have two ISP 1. Dhakacom 2.Link3
>
> I want to make Dhakacom as a Primary for Inbound traffic
>
> For Dhakacom as-path-prepend "AS AS "
>
> For Link3 as-path-prepend "AS AS AS AS AS AS AS AS";
>
> But unfortunately data for inbound traffic comes through Link3 instead of
> Dhakacom
>
>
>
> Please help
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:01 PM, Faisal Hasan <hasansf at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I see a lot of discussing is going on about the BD Route link at nanog.
>> Did anyone respond about it from BD side?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Faisal
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Graham Beneke <graham at apolix.co.za>
>> Date: Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:45 AM
>> Subject: Re: Route leak in Bangladesh
>> To: nanog at nanog.org
>>
>>
>> On 30/06/2015 17:09, Job Snijders wrote:
>> > If you were the network causing a leak of this type, prefix filters on
>> > inbound facing your customers might not have prevented this.
>> >
>> > 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.
>>
>> We seem to be assuming that this leak occurred within the context of a
>> customer-provider BGP relationship.
>>
>> But what if this is not the case?
>>
>> What if this was a peering session - perhaps via a route server at an
>> exchange point. max-pref on a session with a route server is an
>> extremely blunt (and potentially ineffective) tool for the job.
>>
>> In some regions the use to route servers and the lack of clue about
>> anything BGP beyond one session to the route server (and one session to
>> transit) is scary. We place our faith in the IXP operator, that they
>> know best, while there may be no evidence that they do... ;-)
>>
>> --
>> Graham Beneke
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nog mailing list
>> nog at bdnog.org
>> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nog mailing list
> nog at bdnog.org
> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.bdnog.org/pipermail/nog/attachments/20150702/4d2fefd2/attachment.html>