GRH Peering Policy (Was: 1::1/128 + 2::2/128 - GRH Anomalies Delta (2012-08-17))

"Roger Jørgensen" roger at
Fri Aug 17 14:50:06 CEST 2012

> Hi,
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 02:43:51PM +0200, "Roger Jørgensen" wrote:
>> > On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 02:38:25PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>> >> As such, if possible please formulate a proper GRH peering policy
>> that
>> >> works best for the community that uses the system, we can then put it
>> up
>> >> on the GRH pages and inform peers of this change.
>> >
>> > "Please send all BGP prefixes that you have in your routers, except
>> those
>> > that are generated in your AS or in downstream ASes and not advertised
>> to
>> > upstream (transit) routers"
>> >
>> > Might be too complicated to understand, tho...
>> "Please send us all BGP prefixes announced to your upstream (transit)" ?
> No, that's not the right one.  GRH wants to see "what people see", so
> everything *received* from the upstream is much more worth for GRH than
> "sent to upstream".
> "sent to upstream" is only a useful criteria for prefixes generated
> internally (to differenciate between "the aggregate" and "all the
> unaggregated stuff one needs inside the AS, but the world should never
> see").

I had it the wrong way around, I did mean recieved from your
upstream/transit... but that to excluded some date like what's generated
inside the network.

Roger Jorgensen      | - ROJO9-RIPE  - RJ1866P-NORID
roger at   | - The Future is IPv6

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list