Level 3's IRR Database

Mon Jan 31 13:42:06 UTC 2011

On 1/31/2011 1:18 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> Based on this draft the recommended preference order is:
>>
>> 1) Validation ok
>> 2) not found
>> 3) Validation nok
>>
>> Suppose an operator would use local-pref to achieve this.
>> This intention (preferring validated routes) will break, when there's a
>> more specific announcement that doesn't validate.
>> For example the youtube incident would not have been stopped by doing this.
> i do not understand your logic.
>
> let's try to show the case
>
>     666.42.0.0/16 has a roa for as 777
>     666.42.1.0/24 has a roa for as 888
>
> an announcement comes for 666.42.1.0/24 originating from as 999.  are
> you implying that it should be marked valid?  i sure don't want it to.
>
> an announcement for 666.42.0.0/16 from as 777 would still be valid.
>

Andree was saying,

666.42.0.0/16 has a roa for as 777

you start receiving

666.42.0.0/24 and 666.42.1.0/24, both unsigned. Changing preference 
isn't enough to stop routing, as it's a more specific route and 
automatically wins if it gets into the table.

Jack