"Is BGP safe yet?" test

Mon Apr 20 19:27:30 UTC 2020

On 2020-04-20 22:01, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 3:37 PM Denys Fedoryshchenko
> <nuclearcat at nuclearcat.com> wrote:
> 
>> There is simple use case that will prove this page is giving false
>> positive
>> for their "name&shame" strategy.
>> Any AS owner with default route only (yes it happens a lot) users
>> will
>> get:
>> "YOUR ISP TERRIBLE, HIS BGP NOT SAFE!".
>> But he have nothing to validate! His BGP is implemented safely,
>> its just his upstream is not validating routes.
> 
> So, that same ISP who is not validating because it has a default route
> could push its providers to do validation and then be as safe as other
> validating themselves ?
> 
> Rubens
Typically, those who have "default route only" are too small to be 
heard,
and their "wishes" doesn't go beyond the first line of support.
Not to mention that it does not work at all if upstream is a monopoly,
especially a state monopoly, who wont move a finger for "optional 
features".

And most important, the most common answer:
All Tier-1 implemented it? No.
Major hosting operators, such as AWS, gcloud, etc? - No.
So...