routing-wg
Threads by month
- ----- 2026 -----
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2025 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2024 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2023 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2022 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2021 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2020 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2019 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2018 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2017 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2016 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2015 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2014 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2013 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2012 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2011 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2010 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2009 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2008 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2007 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2006 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2005 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2004 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2003 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2002 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2001 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2000 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1999 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1998 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1997 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1996 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1995 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1994 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1993 -----
- December
- November
November 1996
- 1 participants
- 2 discussions
Dear colleagues,
hierarchical authorization in the RIPE-db as a new feature presented at
the last RIPE meeting is not limited to inetnum objects or the domain
name space. It is also applicable to route objects. However, it has not
yet been implemented for route objects because no consensus was found on
how to do it. With this mail I want to start the discussion again. Please
note, that this is only the draft of a draft - nothing final. So drop your
comments here!
In my opinion, route objects are not much different from inetnum objects
regarding hierarchical authorization. Both span a certain range of IP
addresses and in both cases hierarchical authorization controls definition
of IP subranges. Following this reasoning it seems to be simple to implement
within the IP prefix tree.
However, route objects are not standing alone but are logically linked to
AS objects via the origin tag. Applying hierarchical authorization within
the IP prefix tree *alone* does allow uncontrolled creation of route objects
of differing origin. Therefore, AS objects which match the origin AS of a
route object may be considered as parent objects of route objects. I think
this is a very useful approach (even though it links different types of
objects in one authorization hierarchy).
There have been ideas that route objects should only be created if proper
address allocation occured. However, it has also been pointed out that it
is not a good idea to mix address allocation and routing for several rea-
sons, e.g. some registries are pure routing registries and all registries
should have the same structure. Moreover, changes in routing might make
changes in address registration necessary (and vice versa). There have been
some good comments on this topic on the database wg mailing list. Never-
theless, if no route objects exist for allocated address space, any AS
owner may generate route objects uncontrolled in this registry (creation
of objects in one registry which are protected by hierarchical authorization
in another is also not covered but this is an entirely different problem).
Obviously, there are still some loose ends. But I think that the approach
of AS objects as parents of route objects from corresponding origin com-
bined with hierarchical authorization within the IP prefix tree is very
useful and may be applied here. Shall we go for this?
Regards
Joachim Schmitz
_____________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Joachim Schmitz schmitz(a)noc.dfn.de
DFN Network Operation Center
Rechenzentrum der Universitaet Stuttgart ++ 711 685 5553 voice
Allmandring 30 ++ 711 678 8363 FAX
D-70550 Stuttgart FRG (Germany)
_____________________________________________________________________________
3
2
02 Nov '96
Dear Routing WG members,
since there have been no additional comments on the minutes of our
session at RIPE 25 I conclude that the minutes are accepted as is.
I updated some URLs but there is no other change.
The final version of the minutes is appended below. Thanks again to
Mike Norris who took them.
Regards
Joachim
--------
RIPE 25, Amsterdam
Routing Working Group
Report of Meeting, 23rd September 1996
1. Opening and Administrivia
Willem van der Scheun, Chairman, presided and welcomed people
to the meeting. There were 89 attenders. Mike Norris took
minutes.
2. Agenda bashing
A draft agenda of business, circulated by the Chairman in the
previous week, was agreed.
3. Chairman of the Routing WG
Willem announced that his day job prevented him from devoting
the time necessary to chairmanship of the WG and that he was
standing down. He was pleased to say that Joachim Schmitz would
accept his proposal to be Chairman, and this proposal was
endorsed by the meeting. Members thanked Willem for his work
as Chairman and guidance of the WG. Joachim chaired the
remainder of the meeting.
4. Report from the RIPE NCC
Daniel Karrenberg said that the RIPE NCC planned to resume its
studies of route aggregation. An exercise he had conducted
earlier in 1996 and reported to RIPE 24 had revealed plenty
of room for improvement. Individual reports to those responsible
for over-specific routing had resulted in significant improvements.
Since then, however, the aggregation situation had disimproved.
Daniel's impression was that some ISPs didn't care or wouldn't
take the trouble to correct matters.
Further remedial action was needed and the Contributors' Committee
supported the NCC in this work. Skilled staff would soon be
appointed and they would help ISPs in promoting route aggregation.
While neither RIPE nor the NCC could take action against any
offenders, the use of peer pressure among the ISPs could be
used in a positive manner to improve the position.
The meeting encouraged ISPs to supply BGP data to the NCC on
request for the purpose of analysing route aggregation.
New Action: the NCC would report on route aggregation at RIPE 26.
5. Working Experience with Route Object Editor (ROE)
ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/presentations/ripe-m25-jschmitz-work-exp-roe.html
Joachim Schmitz reported on his experience with ROE. This was
part of the RA Toolset and had been written by Cengiz
Alaettinoglu. Its purpose was to view and manipulate route
objects and to compare them with operational routes. It worked
on routes as objects from Internet routing registries (IRRs)
and as determined from routers (by means of input BGP tables).
Compiled with C++ in a Tcl/Tk environment, ROE was easy to
install. With its GUI it was easy to use. As not all IRRs
were aligned in the way they worked, ROE displayed separate
route registrations where appropriate.
Joachim found it slow in operation, although Cengiz later
indicated that this was probably due to network and server
performance and not to the ROE program execution. It was
also not clear to Joachim whether live or mirrored IRR data
was used.
He suggested that the program could be improved by allowing
more configuration options and greater clarity in some of the
messages. This and other feedback should be directed to
Cengiz.
Overall, he recommended ROE for operational use, particularly
for complex routing tasks.
6. Progressive BGP route flap dampening
ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/presentations/ripe-m25-tbarber-bgp-damp.html
Tony Barber gave a presentation on the strategies used by
UUnet-Pipex to reduce the effects of route flapping and to
try to prevent router table overflow. These were:
- route dampening
- prefix filtering
- more router memory
They had encountered many instabilities from peers and found
that many ISPs had not deployed CIDR; this gave rise to more
flapping as more routes, and particularly more specific ones,
were advertised.
Tony explained the parameters used for route dampening on a
Cisco router. He had arrived at the following re-use times
for various route sizes:
/24 and greater ~160 minutes
/23 and /22 ~60 minutes
/21 and less ~30 minutes
He recommended filtering out all prefixes more specific than /24.
While route dampening consumed router memory, this was more or
less balanced by a reduction in routing CPU cycles.
He recommended that if route dampening was to be widely
deployed in Europe, consistency was important. In this sense,
the Routing WG should agree on guidelines for parameters to
be used.
In discussion, the following points were made:
- aggregation works in reducing router load and route
flapping.
- route flapping is often a feature of certain autonomous
systems rather than a function of prefix length.
- much instability was due to configuration changes and
errors as distinct from link failures.
- making dampening dependent on prefix length could
penalise many stable /24s.
- it might be useful to discriminate against /24s in the
192.0.0.0/8 block (the swamp).
- the focus should be on keeping noise out of the system
rather than trying to mitigate against it once in the
system.
In summary, it was agreed that route dampening was an
important topic and that more discussion was needed.
7. Routing Policy analysis tools
http://www.isi.edu/ra/Presentations
Cengiz Alaettinoglu of ISI presented a review of recent
developments and updates in the RA toolset, now at version
3.4.0.
The set of front-end tools used a number of back-end libraries,
which made program development easier. It required RAWhoisd
v3.0 and had been ported to several operating systems. Cengiz
gave details of availability (URL = http://www.isi.edu/ra/RAToolSet
as official reference or copies also available from
ftp://ftp.isi.edu/ra/RAToolSet/RAToolSet-3.4.1.tar.gz or
ftp://ftp.ra.net/routing.arbiter/tools/RAToolSet/RAToolSet-3.4.1.tar.gz )
and of the mailing list (ratoolset(a)isi.edu, subscription via robot
majordomo(a)isi.edu) The toolset was made available for demonstration
purposes to attenders of RIPE 25.
RtConfig generated the BGP access list part ofrouter
configuration from route objects. It was now used in
production by some major network operators.
ROE was again shown, with reference to review options
before submitting a changed route object.
The AS object editor (AOE) was not implemented, though it
was on demo at RIPE 25.
CIDRAdvisor identifies 'safe' aggregates by route originators
as well as aggregates for proxies. Cengiz showed the effects
of using various radius values for the distance that aggregation
should hold.
Summary of Actions
------------------
Action 22.10 on Joachim Schmitz
To trigger the discussion on the mailing list of the Routing WG,
which focus to choose for a future tool development project and
to come to consensus on it
Action 24.4 on Joachim Schmitz
To investigate the status of the CIDR FAQ and see whether additions
are needed, probably by triggering a discussion on the mailing list
New action 25.R1 on Daniel Karrenberg/RIPE NCC
To report on the results from the route aggregation analysis on
the 26th RIPE meeting
New action 25.R2 on Joachim Schmitz
To coordinate making the presentations at the Routing WG available.
This action is already done.
Mike Norris
23/9/96
_____________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Joachim Schmitz schmitz(a)noc.dfn.de
DFN Network Operation Center
Rechenzentrum der Universitaet Stuttgart ++ 711 685 5553 voice
Allmandring 30 ++ 711 678 8363 FAX
D-70550 Stuttgart FRG (Germany)
_____________________________________________________________________________
1
0