Re: Route leak in Bangladesh

[Hugo Slabbert <hugo () slabnet com>]

On Wed 2015-Jul-01 17:02:13 +0200, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu> wrote:

> On 1/Jul/15 16:54, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> > you probably want to ignore more rpsl constructs and depend solely on
> > as-sets, aut-nums and route/route6 objects.  RPSL is not going to live up
> > to your expectations.
>
> Honestly, I'm ambivalent about using the IRR data for prefix-list
> generation (even without RPSL), also because of how much junk there is
> in there, and also how redundant some of it really is, e.g., someone
> creating a /32 (IPv4) route object and yet we only accept up to a /24
> (IPv4) on the actual eBGP session, e.t.c.
>
> What I'm more focused is how we can continue to scale our current
> system, which is much more strict, focuses on deploying customer
> aggregates + le 24 & le 128, instead of enumerating all possible
> de-aggregates that have been registered in the IRR (helps keep the
> configuration file small and manageable, without sacrificing
> reachability). And then see how we can add RPKI into the mix to make
> things even simpler, if at all.

Orphaned/crufty data and braindead moves (e.g. someone including a large 
upstream's AS-SET in their own or something) aside, the deagg issue should 
be handled by the tools, no?  We do automated prefix gen from IRR data, and 
I know IRRPT will aggregate the route records before spitting out the 
prefix list.  I would have assumed that other tools do the same?  Options 
are available to define your max prefix length and then build your filters 
off of that, e.g. <aggregated route object> upto /<max prefix len>.  You 
still face issues with people people registering discontiguous blocks (e.g.  
network has a.b.0.0/22 but creates records for a.b.0.0/23 and a.b.3.0/24, 
but leaves out a.b.2.0/24), but there isn't much we can do about that 
without human interaction to verify the actual allocation.

Also:

> focuses on deploying customer aggregates + le 24 & le 128...

Jeebuz; you accept /128s?  Perhaps "le 24 & le 48"?

> Mark.

--
Hugo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature