[db-wg] Route(6) objects

Kaupo Ehtnurm wrote on 10/07/2023 08:06:
> No, but I was wondering what do other AS-s do with my ipv6 prefix, if 
> they are using IRR filtering in bgp.
> I am not talking only about providers and providers providers. I am 
> talking about all the AS-s in that participate in the global table and 
> accept the full bgp table and filter it based on the IRR and/or ROA 
> record. How can I be sure that they won't just drop my prefixes only 
> because of the incorrect route6 object values?
> To eliminate the risk of my prefix getting blocked in some third party 
> AS I would like to have correct route(6) objects, not almost correct 
> (which technically are incorrect).

Most transit providers accept <= the route/route6 prefix length.  Some 
IXPs filter strictly.

The best thing to do is to test this out and see if announcing an 
upstream /48 works.  You can use e.g. ripe atlas or other measurement 
networks to test connectivity paths while upstream mitigation is in 
place, both with a /48 IRRDB entry for the announcement in question, and 
without.  This should give you a clear idea about whether using 
individual /48s is worth the effort (I suspect the answer is probably not).

Nick

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/attachments/20230712/4bc537c1/attachment.html>