[59244] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IRR/RADB and BGP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael Hallgren)
Fri Jun 20 12:49:47 2003
From: "Michael Hallgren" <m.hallgren@free.fr>
To: "Andy Dills" <andy@xecu.net>, "Deepak Jain" <deepak@ai.net>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 18:47:08 +0200
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.44.0306201219150.46882-100000@thunder.xecu.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Deepak Jain wrote:
>
> >
> > > I strongly approve of such requirement. I know that it is in
> the peering
> > > agreements of several carriers, but they often don't check or enforce
> > > this. Many register customer routes and ASes. If routes and policies
> > > were properly registered, securing the Internet would be a lot closer
> > > to being possible.
> >
> > Is it safe to assume (now) that all the routes one would care
> to listen to
> > (under normal circumstances)
> > are registered in an IRR now? I remember there used to be
> well-known issues
> > with some networks, especially internationally.
>
> I dunno, there are plenty of smaller ASes who have yet to be forced to
> register their routes.
Of some importance, yes, definitely, since at least some actors (including
Teleglobe, my home) tend to recurse on AS-set when building filters... so
unless registrered all the way down/up, filtered... which, by the way, is
a good moment/reason to help those "smaller ASes" go register (rather than
patching/proxying for them).
Cheers,
mh
>
> We haven't yet been forced, but I finally got motivated to submit them to
> altdb last night. Altdb definitely rocks.
>
> Andy
>
> ---
> Andy Dills
> Xecunet, Inc.
> www.xecu.net
> 301-682-9972
> ---
>
>
