Wed Mar 17 16:30:36 CET 1993
Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg at ripe.net> writes: * * > Peter Lothberg <roll at bsd.stupi.se> writes: * > > 2) networks having an existing AS-number in database but reflected di * ffer * > ently * > > in the routing tables (the can sometimes be a config error). * > > * > > 22.214.171.124 in AS786 (database) and AS1755 (BGP) * > * > This is due to the fact that 126.96.36.199 is used as the London DMZ, and * > even if the EBS receives if with AS786 from the Janet RBS, it will * > prefer the cheapest route, locally connected to the EBS when announced * > to the outside world. * * >From ripe-81: * * ... * o An IP network number can and must only belong to one * AS. This is a direct consequence of the fact that at * each point in the Internet there can be exactly one * routing policy for traffic destined to each network. In * the case of the IP network which is used in neighbor * peering between two ASes, say at the border between two * ASes, a conscious decision must be made as to which AS * this IP network number actually resides in. * ... * * So either the JANET RBS or the EBS should stop injecting this * net into EBONE. Any problems with that? * * Daniel Yep and in this case the RBS should advertise it. Remember this is part of a transition I started for the DMZs. However, it does highlight that people at RBSs should also watch the network statements in their configurations. --Tony.
[ lir-wg Archive ]