[anti-abuse-wg] [routing-wg] [db-wg] Solving the issue of rogue ROUTE objects in the RIPE Database

On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 09:22:53AM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
> >>> I know my employer uses the rr.ntt.net instance on a daily basis.
> >> yes, i built that and heas has done cool stuff.  does your employer
> >> register in ARIN or APNIC irr?  < light goes on?>
> > We encourage anyone to register their routes in the appropiate IRR,
> > especially when that IRR offers strong guarantees about the authenticity
> > of the route-object.
> 
> does ntt register its own routes in the irrs of APNIC, ARIN, etc?  that
> is a binary question.

I believe most prefixes are registered in NTTCOM, but I cannot speak for
the myriad of subsidiaries. I believe NTT (like Level3, Savvis, etc) are
in a rather rare position having their own IRR, as such maybe not the
best material to compare with the other 54281 ASNs out there.

> > I'll take your ad-hominem-employer argument
> 
> exuse me!  you brought up your employer, not i.  and you have not
> answered my question.

You asked about whether I could back up my assertion with measurements
and I offered one datapoint specific to the data consumption side and
many more on the data production side.

> > However, the discussion at hand seems to me to be about the data
> > consumption side, I feel that you raised the implicit question "Are
> > RIR's IRR relevant?" to which my answer is YES.
> 
> unfortunately, the answer for many operators is NO.  they voted with
> their feet.  you can say what they SHOULD do.  my family has a lot of
> jokes about how the world should be.

I don't know why you say this. Does "many operators expressed opinion
with their feet" mean that thus "many other operators" should not
produce or consume IRR data? Is "many" even relevant in an internet
topology that has a noticable cluster as core with tons of stub-edges,
in essence being anything but a full mesh? Even if few operators consume
IRR data and filter accordingly, depending on their size, it can not
only protect their customers and themselves, but large portions of the
global system.

I ran some calculations just now, comparing public data available to me:
should all the RIR's IRR databases cease to exist tomorrow, I estimate
that _at_least_ 65,000 customer prefixes would no longer be accepted by
NTT's filters (the real number ikely is higher as I did not take into
account more-specific pfx/origin covered by registered supernet). I
consider these high numbers.

Please approach me off-list should you have any further NTT specific
questions. (Not only Randy, I'd be happily to elaborate to anyone on how
filters are generated and with which parameters!)

Randy, your assertation that RIR's IRR are not relevant has been noted.
I ask that we continue the discussion about Denis' proposal, under the
assumption that RIR's IRRs are relevant. 

Kind regards,

Job