Re: [GROW] Last Call: <draft-ietf-grow-blackholing-00.txt> (BLACKHOLE BG

On 6/28/16 8:36 AM, Job Snijders wrote:

> Some IXPs can do actual blackholing inside their fabric, a mechanism
> which does _not_ require any of the IXP participants to participate or
> adjust their local routing policy to honor the BLACKHOLE community. I've
> described such a non-cooperative mechanism on the NANOG mailing-list and
> I know of one IXP which has implemented this. (This is different from
> DE-CIX's current implementation.)
sure l3 acls can be applied to l2 ports.

most ixps are going to have a set of filters that prevent certain kinda
of activity, e.g. spanning tree PDUs, router-advertisement, proxy-arp
and so  on. these are all within the technical capabilties of most
high-end-ethernet switch platforms.

> Already today, the reality is that some IXPs can and will blackhole
> traffic at the request of a participant, and some IXPs can't (vendor
> limitations) or won't (miscellaneous concerns) blackhole traffic. This
> draft does not change any of that.
agree

> Kind regards,
>
> Job

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature