Hello
I was hoping that somebody is experienced with this situation and could advise me, what the correct way by-the-book would be.
But I will just accept creating /32 route6 object and hope that the /48s won't be filtered out only because of the inaccuracy of route6 object in different ASs across the globe.
But I will just accept creating /32 route6 object and hope that the /48s won't be filtered out only because of the inaccuracy of route6 object in different ASs across the globe.
Lugupidamisega / Best regards,
Kaupo Ehtnurm
Kaupo Ehtnurm
Network & System administrator
WaveCom AS
ISO 9001 & 27001 Certified DC and verified VMware Cloud
From: "Nick Hilliard" <nick@foobar.org>
To: "Kaupo Ehtnurm" <kaupo@wavecom.ee>
Cc: "Kaupo Ehtnurm via db-wg" <db-wg@ripe.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2023 3:51:00 PM
Subject: Re: [db-wg] Route(6) objects
To: "Kaupo Ehtnurm" <kaupo@wavecom.ee>
Cc: "Kaupo Ehtnurm via db-wg" <db-wg@ripe.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2023 3:51:00 PM
Subject: Re: [db-wg] Route(6) objects
Kaupo
Ehtnurm wrote on 10/07/2023 08:06:
Most transit providers accept <= the route/route6 prefix length. Some IXPs filter strictly.
The best thing to do is to test this out and see if announcing an upstream /48 works. You can use e.g. ripe atlas or other measurement networks to test connectivity paths while upstream mitigation is in place, both with a /48 IRRDB entry for the announcement in question, and without. This should give you a clear idea about whether using individual /48s is worth the effort (I suspect the answer is probably not).
Nick
No, but I was wondering what do other AS-s do with my ipv6 prefix, if they are using IRR filtering in bgp.I am not talking only about providers and providers providers. I am talking about all the AS-s in that participate in the global table and accept the full bgp table and filter it based on the IRR and/or ROA record. How can I be sure that they won't just drop my prefixes only because of the incorrect route6 object values?To eliminate the risk of my prefix getting blocked in some third party AS I would like to have correct route(6) objects, not almost correct (which technically are incorrect).
Most transit providers accept <= the route/route6 prefix length. Some IXPs filter strictly.
The best thing to do is to test this out and see if announcing an upstream /48 works. You can use e.g. ripe atlas or other measurement networks to test connectivity paths while upstream mitigation is in place, both with a /48 IRRDB entry for the announcement in question, and without. This should give you a clear idea about whether using individual /48s is worth the effort (I suspect the answer is probably not).
Nick