[136013] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Level 3's IRR Database
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Bates)
Mon Jan 31 16:30:42 2011
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 15:30:01 -0600
From: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
In-Reply-To: <m2ipx46aww.wl%randy@psg.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 1/31/2011 3:06 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
> some folk will want to drop that, i encourage them to, and have done my
> best to see that they have the capability to do so. i am in that camp.
>
I definitely recommend it as BCP.
> others fear rir and black helicopter control of their routing. they may
> not want to drop the 'bad' announcement. i tried to document how they
> might do so.
I think this is fine. It will fix a few minor problems (the problem
network will have to be the same length or shorter to be ignored by
pref), while keeping RPKI from solving the worst of them.
The best of both worlds, IMHO, is to allow all routes were are not
specifically contrary to a valid route. ie, if RIR/government makes a
route invalid, it will still work, unless there is an equal size or
shorter route which is valid (ie, the government not only has to
invalidate your route, but they also have to advertise your route or a
covering route with a valid ROA).
Jack
