No one behind the wheel at WorldCom

Richard A Steenbergen ras at e-gerbil.net
Sun Jul 14 02:20:01 UTC 2002


On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 09:21:16PM -0400, Frank Scalzo wrote:
>
> The underlying problem, is that there are no good widely deployed
> solutions for controlling what the large backbones inject into the
> routing table at peering points. A large tier 1 deaggregates towards
> another bad things happen. It would be nice if there was a supportable
> way to only allow one isp to advertise appropriate routes to another.
> The IRR stuff is a neat idea but I dont think many ISPs trust it enough
> to use it to build ACLs.

If everyone maintained current IRR entries, it would work just fine. The 
real problem is there are still a lot of networks who's idea of filtering 
their customers is a prefix-limit or a filter you have to call or email in 
manually.

The only people who actually maintain accurate IRR entries (other than the 
occational net kook) are those whose transit depends on it. Trying to 
convert an existing customer base to IRR is a nightmarish task, some of 
these large established providers will probably NEVER do it unless there 
is some actual motivation.

Supposidly Level 3 requires IRR filtering on their peers, but do they
actually try to enforce this? I know they do an excellent job maintaining
their own IRR entries, but I'm certain they peer with people who don't
have a current db. Probably not, since the vast majority of their current
peers don't meet their current peering requirements. :)

-- 
Richard A Steenbergen <ras at e-gerbil.net>       http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177  (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA  B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)



More information about the NANOG mailing list