Re: [sig-policy] prop-110v001: Designate 1.2.3.0/24 as Anycast to suppor

To: Jahangir Hossain <jrjahangir at gmail dot com>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-110v001: Designate 1.2.3.0/24 as Anycast to support DNS Infrastructure
From: Geoff Huston <gih at apnic dot net>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 08:11:37 +1100
Cc: "sig-policy at apnic dot net SIG List" <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=apnic.net; s=c3po; h=received:received:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer:return-path; bh=A1avA/ISHCRhOcIZkWEyXKl3bdX/T1RKMeb5Ce6Q/As=; b=DdoW7Fr9XAoTD09hE36EHpsBofp42Of2M7b7z0N3M6lA5+oemANf6v1aW8pIU7PHrTgbtQh8lePEG gVktaNNsp11H9sLdaehzstrU0DBbFrVp+96jv50dFQYV0OEHzbh8Bsq982Vp2HmdKtBFCvZiy5fXym 6NUx312BltvZIyNQ=
In-reply-to: <CAG5EbHJAWOnVUg=SWekAp9m-9z=rLS1L7FgzfMS1VDjOsB=qJw at mail dot gmail dot com>
List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/>
List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/options/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <CALS-_OpDgBHuAiaXD1AfS3F+UWnfcePXC3yCrnCHHZYKiDPmDg@mail.gmail.com> <m2txcrpmat.wl%randy@psg.com> <CAK5YLgfx=Jn4X+Ge+UOjPx6iSRbS4=vsfrEVNggcK7=7CpUFeg@mail.gmail.com> <CAEUfUGPVN18AMhet=kd-4krtcYoV+=Eaz+UfU5EBt04gN=_vUA@mail.gmail.com> <CAG5EbHJAWOnVUg=SWekAp9m-9z=rLS1L7FgzfMS1VDjOsB=qJw@mail.gmail.com>

On 27 Jan 2014, at 4:04 am, Jahangir Hossain <jrjahangir at gmail dot com> wrote:

> Is it not possible to minimize this unsolicited incoming traffic ?

Nope - thats the problem with unsolicited incoming traffic!

The way in which you can limit this incoming dross is to limit the scope of the advertisement of the prefix.

I'd certainly recommend to anyone contemplating using this prefix in the manner proposed here is that they use BGP's NOEXPORT community and similar means to limit the extent to which the route advertisement is propagated. 

regards,

    Geoff