Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:32:49PM -0400, Joel M. Halpern:
> (the authors would not have written it if no one wanted it.)
eh, that might not be a valid argument :)
> Also, one of the arguments for doing this in the router is that you can
> get more timely and precise correlation. Except that for geolocation of
> address blocks, upstream correlation seems to be quite sufficiently
> stable and precise. NLRI may come and go. I fone has geo-information,
> it is unlikely to change.
This may have been answered, but in case not or un-clear; what I and I
believe others refer to here as geo location, is different from what you
and randy are talking about in the sense of the IETF's prefixes. I do not
always care about that location.
I am placing my own marks on routes - where I hear them; region, country,
metro, relationship with the neighbor, etc. Though it is not the whole
story, this is typically of more interest to me.
If a neighbor AS does similarly and sends them to me, I could make use of
them. However, as you observed, these are all choices local to the AS -
the values, whether to send them, etc. There is definitely a maintenance
cost associate with using this data and a question of accuracy.
Other's comments about accuracy and burden of external enrichment are valid.
Whether this particular additional resolution is much of a burden on routers,
I suspect not, but I am not an implementer.
Authors: please use a spell checker. Also seems a few of the reference
links are broken.
OPSAWG mailing list