On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 07:45:15PM -0400, Rob Foehl wrote: > >It'd be interesting to find out what code these folk are running. Hopefully > >not one of my bugs. :-) > > I've never had an interaction with AS_SET that could be described as > anything other than broken -- like, ever, from any vendor. I'd > prefer to see them disappear entirely, but if that doesn't happen,
As Jared noted, this was more of a common thing back-in-the-day. For properly operating proxy aggregation, you'd generally hope that all contributing networks were properly behind the aggregating party. However, as the Internet has gotten more meshy, those topological considerations don't apply anywhere near as much. As this torches and pitch-forks campaign against as-set continues, operators will have to figure out whether they're really happy with the two impacts: - No proxy aggregation, ever? - Lie about the AS_PATH when you do it. Today you can at least infer that proxy aggregation is happening. The second point has entertaining impact vs. RPKI, so that's the likely forcing function. > at least having a "no-as-sets-under-any-circumstances" policy knob > would be helpful... It's a fine policy knob, and I'm more supportive of that in general. -- Jeff _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
