[c-nsp] prefixes in AS-Set

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 02:53:21AM +0300, Martin T wrote:
> why would one like to limit(maximum-prefix) ingress prefixes from IPX?

Because you really don't want to receive leaked full-tables from your
peers.  Mistakes happen, and your customers will not like it if you
route "all of the Internet" through a completely overloaded peer router
that just attracted many gigs of extra traffic...

> Doesn't more prefixes mean more choice in terms of routes?
> In addition, for example in case of this "peval AS-ACCESSFORALL | sed
> 's/({//;s/})//;s/, /\n/g' | aggregate -q" example, there are 32
> different aggregated prefixes. Now if set maximum-prefix limit value
> to 20, which prefixes are accepted? First 20 which are seen by the
> router?

If you exceed the max-prefix set, the session will go down.  It's a safeguard.

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert at greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 305 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20110805/1b1c9053/attachment-0001.pgp>