Trouble reaching whois.ripe.net and www.ietf.org
jhma at mcvax.org
Thu Oct 19 16:59:02 CEST 2006
Niels Bakker wrote:
> They are an AMS-IX member and have an open peering policy. This would
> be worthless for them if they could not attract traffic there.
> Perhaps connectivity would be better if other networks didn't filter.
> Or they could set no-export but then they'd be bitten by networks that
> reset all communities inbound. In the end you're always dependent on
> other people's networks to deliver the bits to your border routers.
For a while, because of a configuration error, we were announcing our /42
without setting the 'no-export' community. This is now fixed but the old
route may be stuck in some routers out there. In general we would prefer
traffic to follow the SURFnet path from anywhere except directly peered
networks. As you say, this doesn't work when a peer decides not to honour
our 'no-export' :-(
So, to any of the RIPE NCC's IPv6 peers who may be reading this, please
honour our 'no-export' (it's there for a reason!) and do NOT advertise
2001:610:240::/42 to your peers and/or upstreams. If you insist on
propagating our route then, at the very least, do not filter the traffic
which the route attracts.
James Aldridge, Systems and Network Engineer
RIPE Network Coordination Centre Tel: +31 20 535 4421
Singel 258 P.O. Box 10096 Fax: +31 20 535 4445
1016 AB Amsterdam 1001 AB Amsterdam GSM: +31 6 1092 2791
The Netherlands The Netherlands Email: james at ripe.net
More information about the ipv6-ops