(Loose) uRPF vs. non-announced IXP space

[Phil Mayers]

On 08/02/12 15:57, Daniel Roesen wrote:

>
>> Of course it's a SHOULD, so it's reasonable for an override option:
>>
>> ipv6 icmp source-address LoopbackX
>>
>> ...to exist. But not to be the default.
>
> ... which doesn't fix the underlying issue. Who says that routers do
> have loopbacks within a globally advertised prefix?

I don't disagree. Sourcing from the loopback was not my suggestion; I 
was responding to the previous question.

I'm no expert on the design and operation of IXP networks, so I can't 
comment on the correct solution - the thread that Bernhard linked to in 
his 2nd message seems to list a few options, none of which were 
universally liked.