[6bone] Re: routing concern

[Robert J. Rockell]

->As this appears to be a genuine "fat fingers" mistake, my take on it is
->as follows:
->I know exactly what I'm doing when I don't filter the route. If *my*
->IPv6 routing goes down because Rob made a mistake, it's my fault
->(because I did not filter) and not Rob's (because mistakes do happen).

agree, and disagree,

This was one objection to 2772 when it was first brought it up way back in
(Orlando?) IETF.  I disagree. One can have fun with their own network, or
with networks that collectively agree to have fun.  You having fun, and then
passing on your 'fun' to another network who is not interested, is bad mojo.
For this reason, you will notice the 2772 uses MUST in places, with a
backdoor of something to the effect of "unless otherwise agreed upon by your
connection partner".

so, I don't want to have fun with any of my peers/customers (or more
correctly, I am not at the current time engaged in any organized learning
initiative with any entity outside of AS6175) so please filter me strictly.

Having fun at the expense of others is not cool... Notice that the  bad
aggregate we announced won't hurt anyone who is receiving a full table, but
tomorrow, when I inject at /48 prefix inside 2001:400::/35 by mistake,
it could...

The 6bone is a learning network.  However, keep your learning site-local,
unless people agree that they want to learn too, please.



->
->Michel.
->
->