[181731] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Route leak in Bangladesh
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joe Abley)
Wed Jul 1 12:03:18 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: "Joe Abley" <jabley@hopcount.ca>
To: "Jared Mauch" <jared@puck.Nether.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2015 12:03:16 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20150701150336.GC6380@puck.nether.net>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 1 Jul 2015, at 11:03, Jared Mauch wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 03:54:16PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>> On 01/07/2015 15:51, Mark Tinka wrote:
>>> I found RPSL complicated a few years ago, and sort of put that on
>>> the
>>> back-burner.
>>
>> you probably want to ignore more rpsl constructs and depend solely on
>> as-sets, aut-nums and route/route6 objects. RPSL is not going to
>> live up
>> to your expectations.
>
> Yes, like any technology there are lots of knobs that one could
> use but are not recommended.
>
> You just need these few objects and life will be simple.
... as long as the people responsible for maintaining those as-sets
don't get confused and include lots of other inappropriate as-sets by
reference, right?
The idea of configuring this stuff from the IRR is great in terms of
distributing the ops cycles in the right places, but it doesn't help
with verifying that the end result isn't insane, as I think you and Mike
have described on this list over the past couple of days.
Joe
