[routing-wg] Analysis tool for RIPE Proposal 2018-06

Hi,

I support 2018-06. This cleanup is a very good idea!

(this proposal is originally from Oct'2018)

Is there any special reason to be "stuck"?


Best Regards,
Carlos



On Wed, 6 Mar 2019, Jay Borkenhagen wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I support this clean-up of RIPE-NONAUTH IRR using information
> published in the RPKI.
>
> AT&T has been allocated 99.112.0.0/12, and we have not sub-allocated
> 99.122.224.0/21 to Akamai, CW-EUROPE-GSOC, AS1273, or anyone.  Folks
> are encouraged to use the ROA we have published for 99.112.0.0/12
> authorizing origination in our as7018 in all ways that make sense,
> including removing bogus / obsolete route objects from the IRR.
>
> Thanks!
>
> 						Jay B.
>
>
> On 06-March-2019, Job Snijders writes:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I wrote a small tool to help understand the effects if RIPE Policy
> > Proposal 2018-06 is accepted by the community. This is the "Let's use
> > RPKI ROAs to clean up the non-authoritative RIPE-NONAUTH IRR
> > source!"-proposal (source: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2018-06).
> > The tool can also be used by RIPE NCC staff to validate their
> > implementation or help their impact analysis.
> >
> > Quick reminder: this proposal does *not* impact any RIPE Managed space,
> > this does *not* impact IP space for which no RPKI ROAs have or can be
> > created, and it does *not* impact route objects where the route object
> > and the RPKI ROA are match each other.
> >
> > Currently there are 793 IRR "route:" objects and 17 "route6:" objects
> > that conflict with published RPKI ROAs. Out of those ~ 800, roughly 33
> > prefixes are visible in the BGP DFZ as exact matches between what is
> > registered in RIPE-NONAUTH and in BGP (note: this means these 33
> > announcements are "RPKI Invalid", and the likes of Cloudflare / AT&T
> > probably aren't accepting those announcements anyway)...
> >
> > You can install the tool through 'pip3 install ripe-proposal-2018-06', or
> > download the source from https://github.com/job/ripe-proposal-2018-06
> >
> > Usage example:
> >
> >     $ ripe-proposal-2018-06 -a 7018
> >     Downloading https://rpki.gin.ntt.net/api/export.json
> >     Downloading https://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/dbase/split/ripe-nonauth.db.route.gz
> >
> >     INVALID! The 99.122.224.0/21AS1273 RIPE-NONAUTH route object has conflicts:
> >
> >         route:          99.122.224.0/21
> >         descr:          route for customer Akamai International
> >         origin:         AS1273
> >         created:        2008-09-08T14:40:49Z
> >         last-modified:  2018-09-04T15:54:45Z
> >         source:         RIPE-NONAUTH
> >         mnt-by:         CW-EUROPE-GSOC
> >
> >         Above non-authoritative IRR object is in conflict with this ROA:
> >             ROA: 99.112.0.0/12, MaxLength: 12, Origin AS7018 (ARIN)
> >
> > Note that AT&T has no method of getting this erroneous "route:" object
> > removed, other than to beg & plead with maintainer 'CW-EUROPE-GSOC'.
> >
> > We're working on an updated version of RIPE Policy Proposal 2018-06 to
> > incorporate feedback from the community, such as an attempt to send
> > notifications and a grace period before the object is actually removed.
> >
> > All in all it appears that if this policy proposal is deployed *now*,
> > the operational impact is virtually non-existent; and after deploying
> > this the global community has an industry-standard way to get rid of
> > stale proxy route registrations. With every published ROA the
> > "RIPE-NONAUTH" source becomes cleaner!
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Job
>