On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 07:46:47AM +0900, Randy Bush wrote: > > The following RIR IRR's are in use today: RIPE, APNIC, AfriNIC, ARIN. > > most operators in X do not register routes in irrX for all X except RIPE
Sorry, I don't understand what you are saying here. > > I do not agree with "most rir irr instances are unused". > > cool. maybe you could back your disagreement up with measurement. Anybody who generate filters using the IRRd query protocol with a client like peval, bgpq3 or something in-house; pointed at whois.radb.net or rr.ntt.net, indirectly use those RIR IRRs. I know my employer uses the rr.ntt.net instance on a daily basis. I cannot measure whether other people's queries against rr.ntt.net result in prefix filters being deployed somewhere. Here are some measurements from August 2015 comparing what objects are in IRR and which of those objects were 'confirmed' in BGP DFZ. DB | IRR objects | Corresponding BGP announcements (match pfx + origin) --------+-------------+-------------+-- ratio JPIRR | 8889 | 6478 | .728 BBOI | 1330 | 766 | .575 RIPE | 286294 | 139263 | .486 <-- RIR Afrinic | 496 | 237 | .477 <-- RIR TC | 3090 | 1411 | .456 ALTDB | 13440 | 5169 | .384 APNIC | 97955 | 30219 | .308 <-- RIR ARIN | 26872 | 8256 | .307 <-- RIR GT | 2474 | 745 | .301 LEVEL3 | 89812 | 23198 | .258 RADB | 769328 | 145845 | .189 SAVVIS | 103362 | 19064 | .184 NTTCOM | 238914 | 43832 | .183 RGNET | 314 | 45 | .143 BELL | 29545 | 656 | .022 -------------------------------------------- I only looked for exact matches in the DFZ (table taken from NLNOG RING LG with ~ 50 feeds). I did not check what the ratio is like when taking more-specific announcements for registered prefixes into consideration. Kind regards, Job
