nanog mailing list archives

RE: BellSouth prefix deaggregation (was: as6198 aggregation event)


From: "McBurnett, Jim" <jmcburnett () msmgmt com>
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 15:07:46 -0400




IMHO, I think we should create a route-set obj like call 
it... RS-DEAGGREGATES and list all the major irresponsible 
providers's specific /24's in it...

CASE: Business has a /24 from X provider in order to multihome.
That /24 is de-aggregated from a /19, with this policy that
/24 may not be routed.

possible exception: When 2002-3 get passed by ARIN, this could even take
on new meaning. ARIN says they will use a single /8 for the handing
out of /22-/24 for multihoming end users.  will you then filter those 
/24's also?

Also:
What happens when that /24 for Business Y noted above is dual routed
by ISP A and ISP B, and ISP A's upstream filters but ISP B's does not?
Will there be asymmetric routing?


Finally: 
Can anyone from BellSouth, explain the end goal of the de-aggregation?

I suspect with 40 + ASs they may be rebuilding their network with a
recently announced list of new IP services and DSL growth as asked for
under the Federal government  Rural DSL regulations... (I'm not trying to defend
them, just giving some possibilities)

So some ASes who wish to not accept deaggregated specifics 
using RPSL can update their AS import policy to not import 
RS-DEAGGREGATES...



Just my humble opinion..  Comments/critics welcome :)

-hc

-- 
Haesu C.
TowardEX Technologies, Inc.
Consulting, colocation, web hosting, network design and implementation
http://www.towardex.com | haesu () towardex com
Cell: (978)394-2867     | Office: (978)263-3399 Ext. 170
Fax: (978)263-0033      | POC: HAESU-ARIN


On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 11:26:49AM -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:

On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 01:02:57PM +0000, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:

Can anyone from BellSouth comment?  What if a few other 
major ISPs were
to add a thousand or so deaggregated routes in a few 
weeks time?  Would
there be a greater impact?

one word - irresponsible

    This clearly stands out to me as a reason to keep and use
prefix filtering on peers to reduce the amount of junk in 
the routing
tables.  If bellsouth needs to leak more specifics for load 
balancing
purposes, fine, just make sure those routes don't leave 
your upstreams
networks and waste router memory for the rest of us that 
don't need to
see it.

    - Jared

(Note: The above numbers are based on data from 
cidr-report.org.  Some
other looking glasses were also checked to see if 
cidr-report.org's view
of these AS's is consistent with the Internet as a 
whole.  This appears
to be the case, but corrections are welcome.)

-Terry

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu] On 
Behalf Of Terry Baranski
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2003 3:01 PM
To: 'James Cowie'; nanog () merit edu
Subject: RE: as6198 aggregation event



James Cowie wrote:

On Friday, we noted with some interest the 
appearance of more 
than six hundred deaggregated /24s into the global routing 
tables.  More unusually, they're still in there 
this morning.  

AS6198 (BellSouth Miami) seems to have been 
patiently injecting 
them over the course of several hours, between 
about 04:00 GMT 
and 08:00 GMT on Friday morning (3 Oct 2003).  

If you look at the 09/19 and 09/26 CIDR Reports, 
BellSouth Atlanta
(AS6197) did something similar during this time 
period -- they added
about 350 deaggregated prefixes, most if not all /24's.  

Usually when we see deaggregations, they hit 
quickly and they
disappear quickly; nice sharp vertical jumps in the 
table size.
This event lasted for hours and, more importantly, 
the prefixes 
haven't come back out again, an unusual pattern for 
a single-origin
change that effectively expanded global tables by 
half a percent. 

That AS6197's additions are still present isn't encouraging.

-Terry




-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from 
jared () puck nether net
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My 
statements are only mine.




Current thread: