The Cidr Report

Mon Dec 13 11:39:22 UTC 2004

> - this month, another knee was at 150k [Dec 4th] and similarly 
>   garbled results came out. Again, no response.
> ...in this one year we've seen the shape of the climb return to the 
> curve characterized by two years 99-01. Going for e?  I'm not quite 
> sure what the current point of the report is if no-one responds to
> even it breaking.

Knee? Shape? Curve? Are you reading the same CIDR report
that I see here every Friday? The report that I see is
basically a dump of raw data. Perhaps the author needs
to remember the distinction between data and information
and make the CIDR report into something that people
*WANT* to read. This posting of yours contained far more
information than any CIDR report.

> Those believing otherwise are encouraged to send real, hard data.
> There is no meaningful data I can find since the Bellovin/Bush/
> Griffin/Rexford 2001 paper.

I don't know why people like to post cryptic references
to documents or meetings etc. Perhaps there is an implicit
desire to hide it from outsiders who are not part of the
secret inner circle? Perhaps this type of behavior is at
the root of the growing problems, i.e. clue is not being
spread around because people are too cliquish in the way
that they present this info. I'm not talking about NANOG
meetings here, just the list, which arguably reaches more
people than the meetings.

Now, on to Bellovin et al. Janet Rexford wrote this paper
on filtering http://www.research.att.com/~jrex/papers/filter.pdf
This was presented at NANOG but the NANOG site here
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0105/prefix.html points to
Janet's site here http://www.research.att.com/~jrex/nanog/lost.html
(note the word LOST in the URL) which points to Randy's
slides here http://psg.com/~randy/010521.nanog/
unfortunately those appear to be lost...
But there is some video from IETF 51 here
http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/ietf51.html
which might be the same stuff. Bush talks on
Routing Issues.

One would think that if the problems noted in 2001
are not being solved, then perhaps a review of this
material might prove more fruitful than more 
studies of the data. According to the plot here
http://www.cidr-report.org/ the average announcements
per origin AS has actually taken a turn for the better.
And the chart of the BGP table here 
http://bgp.potaroo.net/ seems more like a power
curve than the exponential curve prior to 2001.

--Michael Dillon

--Michael Dillon