[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bad announcement taxonomy
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 6:51 AM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 5:06 AM, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote:
>> some friends and i were talking about recent routing cfs, and found we
>> needed a clearer taxonomy. i throw this out.
>> leak - i receive P and send it on to folk to whom i should not send
>> it for business reasons (transit, peer, ...)
>> mis-origination - i originate P when i do not own it
>> hijack - an intentional mis-origination
>> 7007 - i receive P (or some sub/superset), process it in some way
>> (likely through my igp), and re-originate it, or part of it,
>> as my own
>> we need a name for 7007 other then vinnie
> mis-origination. When you non-maliciously announce P as if you own it
> (even though you do not) the exact details of how you screwed the
> pooch are not externally important. And we have enough obscure names
> for things as it is.
For that matter, just call it a hijack like it is. Don't legitimize
originating a prefix you don't own by giving it an innocuous name.
William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>