[99929] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: How Not to Multihome
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andy Davidson)
Tue Oct 9 13:54:39 2007
In-Reply-To: <DC48C27D-D12A-41A9-A4C8-4EEE08739D3A@icann.org>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@merit.edu>
From: Andy Davidson <andy@nosignal.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 18:52:31 +0100
To: Leo Vegoda <leo.vegoda@icann.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On 9 Oct 2007, at 18:48, Leo Vegoda wrote:
> On 9 Oct 2007, at 17:47, Andy Davidson wrote:
>> However, if a different third-party network then sweeps up their
>> routing table by looking to remove more specifics that seem
>> 'spoofed' using IRR data, the routes you intend to push onto the
>> internet may well start to disappear from their perspective.
> I don't think this should be possible if the database implements
> RPSS (RFC 2725) properly. I believe that it should only be possible
> to create a more specific route object with the agreement using
> whatever PGP/X.509 security you like if you have used mnt-lower and
> mnt-routes attributes as appropriate.
mnt-lower works, but only if I know someone else wants to originate a
more specific. Routing in general doesn't care - this was the case I
was making - hope I didn't cause confusion.
Andy
