ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [GROW] Last Call: <draft-ietf-grow-blackholing-00.txt> (BLACKHOLE BGP Community for Blackholing) to Proposed Standard

2016-06-26 09:24:15
Job Snijders wrote:
Follow-up question: without section 3.4 - would you still object?

I don't think that IXPs should be mentioned anywhere in this document.
For the general case of blackholing, an IXP is a clearing house so
should not get involved in the business of dropping its participants'
traffic.  In the case of route servers, blackholing turns the IXP into a
legal target.

Nick

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>