Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-set-confed-set-01.txt

Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org> Tue, 05 November 2019 19:45 UTC

Return-Path: <jhaas@slice.pfrc.org>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05D471200FF; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 11:45:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2S-JXBZYLzkk; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 11:45:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from slice.pfrc.org (slice.pfrc.org [67.207.130.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A27651200F4; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 11:45:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by slice.pfrc.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id EF74D1E2F7; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 14:49:17 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 14:49:17 -0500
From: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
To: john heasley <heas@shrubbery.net>
Cc: "Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)" <kotikalapudi.sriram@nist.gov>, IDR <idr@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-set-confed-set@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-set-confed-set@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20191105194917.GG3277@pfrc.org>
References: <BN6PR09MB13317B7AD6F4229F5E00FDD284610@BN6PR09MB1331.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> <20191029213844.GC10145@pfrc.org> <BN6PR09MB13310C894E01C67E7E4DC761847F0@BN6PR09MB1331.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> <20191104214109.GC3277@pfrc.org> <20191104230615.GC67962@shrubbery.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20191104230615.GC67962@shrubbery.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/lQAYE_PwEGhZYJlJG5-K2VvlZrE>
Subject: Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-deprecate-as-set-confed-set-01.txt
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 19:45:37 -0000

On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 11:06:15PM +0000, john heasley wrote:
> > It is a BCP that providers should filter routes that cover their address
> > space.  Filtering out P1/24 and longer is easy.  What do they do about
> > P1/22?  What filtering construct says "this overlaps my /24?"  You've
> > created a new policy need, I think. *
> 
> Which BCP is that?  It is quite common that a provider announces their
> assigned aggregate and multi-homed customers announce the prefixes
> assigned to them from that aggregate.  Perhaps I am mis-understanding
> you.

The dangerous of using acronyms.

My meaning was that it's a best common practice in the operational sense,
not that someone wrote and RFC that has received that capital letter
blessing.

If you network is a more specific in that aggregate, what policy construct
are you using to detect that your prefix is being covered in a less specific?

-- Jeff