<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:8.0pt;
margin-left:0in;
line-height:106%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Jay:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">>When we (as7018) were preparing to begin dropping invalid routes<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">>received from peers earlier this year, that is exactly the kind of<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">>analysis we did. In our case we rolled our own with a two-pass<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">>process: we first found all the traffic to/from invalid routes by a<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">>bgp community we gave them, then outside of our flow analysis tool we<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">>further filtered the traffic for invalid routes which were covered by<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">>less-specific not-invalid routes. What remained was the traffic we<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">>would lose once invalid routes were dropped. Had the pmacct<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">>capability existed at that time, we would have used it.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We (NIST) did a detailed analysis of Invalid routes (with Routeviews data)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">that was presented at IETF 101:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-sidrops-origin-validation-policy-considerations-for-dropping-invalid-routes-00">https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-sidrops-origin-validation-policy-considerations-for-dropping-invalid-routes-00</a>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">See slides 10-13. We tried to drill down on Invalid routes which were covered by<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">less-specific not-invalid routes. We examined questions like:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">how often does the less-specific route have the same origin AS (OAS) as the Invalid,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">and, if not, then how frequently is the OAS of the less specific route
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">a transit provider of the OAS of the Invalid route?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We plan to update the results periodically. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Sriram<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>