[135929] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Level 3's IRR Database
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andree Toonk)
Sun Jan 30 21:19:33 2011
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 18:18:27 -0800
From: Andree Toonk <andree+nanog@toonk.nl>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
In-Reply-To: <m2sjwa84td.wl%randy@psg.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Reply-To: andree@toonk.nl
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
.-- My secret spy satellite informs me that at 11-01-30 1:22 PM Randy
Bush wrote:
>> So, what are peoples' routing policies on RPKI going to be? Are people
>> going to drop prefixes with no RPKI record? Or drop prefixes with an
>> incorrect RPKI record? Or drop prefixes with a revoked status?
>
> draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-origin-ops-04.txt
Question,
Based on this draft the recommended preference order is:
1) Validation ok
2) not found
3) Validation nok
Suppose an operator would use local-pref to achieve this.
This intention (preferring validated routes) will break, when there's a
more specific announcement that doesn't validate.
For example the youtube incident would not have been stopped by doing this.
Are there any suggestions or recommendations for how to handle these cases?
Cheers,
Andree
