[148589] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: RIS raw data
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nick Hilliard)
Thu Jan 19 07:13:08 2012
X-Envelope-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 12:12:14 +0000
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
To: andra.lutu@imdea.org
In-Reply-To: <47242.163.117.139.80.1326972244.squirrel@mail.imdea.org>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 19/01/2012 11:24, andra.lutu@imdea.org wrote:
> I am working on getting a better grasp on what data we
> have in the RIS project from RIPE.
> To this end, I am checking the
> export policies of the ASes peering with RIPE AS12654 at different
> IXPs.
> I am wondering if anybody knows what these ASes actually
> announce to the RIPE repositories? Do they dump their entire routing
> tables (including their internal routes) ?
> In some cases I saw
> the export policy ANNOUNCE ANY, is this consistent with a particular AS
> behaving like the RIPE AS was its customer?
> Another type of export
> policy is for example 'to AS12654: ANNOUNCE AS "YYY"
> '(where "YYY" is any AS peering with RIPE in the RIS
> project).
> How is this policy different from the previous one from
> the point of view of the routing feed the RIPE repository receives?
Hi Andra,
INEX used to maintain two peering matrices. One was based on RIPE IRRDB
data; the other was based on netflow/sflow BGP data sampled from the IXP
infrastructure. The difference between the two was shocking.
Nick
