Re: Are specific "route" objects in RIR databases needed?

[Darren O'Connor <darrenoc () outlook com>]

I can't say what everyone else does, but we only make exact matches from route object to prefix-list

http://www.mellowd.co.uk/ccie

> On 30 Jan 2014, at 21:48, "Martin T" <m4rtntns () gmail com> wrote:
>
> Job, Tore: ok, I see. So "route" object in RIR routing registry database
> for each announced prefix is needed only because some ISPs create filters
> exactly the size of the "route" object in database? So for example if there
> is a "route" object for 192.0.2.0/24 in RIR database, then ISP-A might
> create a following strict prefix-filter entry:
>
> policy-options {
>    policy-statement EXAMPLE {
>        term prefixes {
>            from {
>                route-filter 192.0.2.0/24 exact;
>            }
>            then next policy;
>        }
>        then reject;
>    }
> }
>
> On the other hand, ISP-B might create loose filter based on the same
> "route" object like this:
>
> policy-options {
>    policy-statement EXAMPLE {
>        term prefixes {
>            from {
>                route-filter 192.0.2.0/24 upto /32;
>            }
>            then next policy;
>        }
>        then reject;
>    }
> }
>
>
> PS: this is a theoretical question :) I'm also for keeping the BGP table as
> short as possible.
>
>
> regards,
> Martin
>
> > On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Tore Anderson <tore () fud no> wrote:
> >
> > * Job Snijders
> >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 06:51:59PM +0200, Martin T wrote:
> > > >
> > > > for example there is a small company with /22 IPv4 allocation from
> > > > RIPE in European region. This company is dual-homed and would like to
> > > > announce 4x /24 prefixes to both ISPs. Both ISP's update their
> > > > prefix-lists automatically based on records in RIPE database. For
> > > > example Level3 uses this practice at least in Europe. If this small
> > > > company creates a "route" object for it's /22 allocation, then is it
> > > > enough? Theoretically this would cover all four /24 networks. Or in
> > > > which situation it is useful/needed to have "route" object for each
> > > > /24 prefix?
> > >
> > > You should create a route object for each route that you announce, if
> > > you announce 4 x /24 you should create a route: object for each /24.
> >
> > +1
> >
> > > ps. Can you please send 20 dollarcent per /24 to my paypal account
> > > (job () instituut net) with the reference "deaggregation fee"?
> >
> > Indeed.
> >
> > Martin, I'd suggest announcing the 4 x /24s to each ISP tagged with the
> > no-export community in order to achieve whatever you are trying to do,
> > *in addition* to the covering /22. That way you're not polluting Job,
> > my, and everyone else's routing tables more than necessary, only your
> > own ISPs', but then again you're actually paying them for the privilege.
> >
> > Tore