[58029] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Who is announcing bogons?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Vixie)
Tue Apr 29 15:16:18 2003
From: Paul Vixie <paul@vix.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Message from Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
of "Tue, 29 Apr 2003 03:10:10 -0400."
<Pine.GSO.4.44.0304290215340.25246-100000@clifden.donelan.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 19:15:06 +0000
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> > the fun part is watching the bgp announce/withdraws in unallocated space.
> > (no matter what microsoft may have learned from their survey, most isp's
> > don't seem to care which prefixes their bgp-speaking customers advertise.)
>
> So which ISPs are confused? Bogon's don't spontaneously occur in BGP.
> Some ASN must originate them, and ASNs must pass them to other ASNs.
> BGP helpfully includes the ASNs in the path.
geoff huston is the only person i know who's making formal progress on that
question. i know from some zebra log files that iana's unallocated space gets
advertised from time to time, then withdrawn. presumably an attack was launched
during the announcement but i don't have any data showing this.
> What should be done about ASNs which repeatedly announce false or
> unauthorized routes?
apparently, nothing. to the extent that peering is by agreement, the majority
of such agreements now in force do not require the other party to route-filter
their customers. which is funny, since they tend to drone on endlessly about
the importance of a 24x7 NOC, which in operational practice, matters lots less.
(btw, anybody signed a peering agreement which requires an abuse@ mailbox yet?)
