telling the difference between their NANOG and SCA mail?
since I stopped getting both in digest form, maybe it's easier to mix the
two up by mistake.
This will break the internet at scale. No.
Ms. Lady Benjamin PD Cannon of Glencoe, ASCE
6x7 Networks & 6x7 Telecom, LLC
CEO
l...@6by7.net
"The only fully end-to-end encrypted global telecommunications company in the
world.”
FCC License KJ6FJJ
Sent from my iPhone via RFC1149.
> On Aug 9,
On 2021-08-09 22:39, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
man. 9. aug. 2021 22.13 skrev Grzegorz Janoszka
:
On 2021-08-09 17:47, Billy Croan wrote:
How does the community feel about using /24 originations in BGP as
a
tactical advantage against potential bgp hijackers?
RPKI is more effective than a
man. 9. aug. 2021 22.13 skrev Grzegorz Janoszka :
> On 2021-08-09 17:47, Billy Croan wrote:
> > How does the community feel about using /24 originations in BGP as a
> > tactical advantage against potential bgp hijackers?
>
> RPKI is more effective than a competing /24. Unless they hijack you ASn
On 2021-08-09 17:47, Billy Croan wrote:
How does the community feel about using /24 originations in BGP as a
tactical advantage against potential bgp hijackers?
RPKI is more effective than a competing /24. Unless they hijack you ASn
as well.
--
Grzegorz Janoszka
Bill said,
> > Is this seen as route table pollution, or a necessary evil in today's
> world?
>
> Pollution. And it won't save you from a hijack either, since your
> adversary's /24 routes will compete and win for at least part of the
> Internet.
>
I agree, of course, that moving to announce
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 10:31 AM Sabri Berisha wrote:
> Just for fun, I did the math. A total of 16,777,216 /24s fit in 32 bits. Take
> away all the reserved space as per IANA (this is 1,266,696 /24s, see below),
> and we end up with 16,777,216 - 1,266,696 = 15,510,520 potential /24
>
Dear team,
I have resorted to more specific announcements during hijacks, though
with only one purpose in mind: To buy us a bit of time while the
upstreams and peers put blocks in place to thwart the hijack as close to
the source as possible. The more specifics are an imperfect solution,
since
I prefer the approach of disaggregating only when needed, not as a
preventative measure. There are tools that can help with automating this
disaggregation (ARTEMIS can do this, for example).
—
Chris
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 10:50 AM Billy Croan
wrote:
> How does the community feel about using
Folks can announce longer than 24 masks all day. They're unlikely to
propagate very far though, since most won't accept longer than 24 from the
world at large.
To the OP, there are some valid reasons to strategically deaggregate here
and there, but a blanket "yolo my entire allocation into /24s"
On 09/08/2021 18:47, Billy Croan wrote:
How does the community feel about using /24 originations in BGP as a
tactical advantage against potential bgp hijackers?
All of our allocations are larger and those prefixes we announce for
clients as well usually are. But we had a request recently to
- On Aug 9, 2021, at 9:22 AM, Masataka Ohta
mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp wrote:
Hi,
> It should be 14M.
Just for fun, I did the math. A total of 16,777,216 /24s fit in 32 bits. Take
away all the reserved space as per IANA (this is 1,266,696 /24s, see below),
and we end up with
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 9:24 AM Masataka Ohta
wrote:
> William Herrin wrote:
> > I did some math on this years ago and it worked out to about 8.5
> > million IPv4 routes.
>
> It should be 14M.
Doubtful. Like I said, I did the math. The question I asked at the time was:
If:
IPv6 fails to overtake
I'm guessing you don't have any v4 to sell? If someone wants to give up
their space of their own free will that's wonderful, but I think most are
opting to sell their resources.
Josh Luthman
24/7 Help Desk: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Mon, Aug
On Mon, 9 Aug 2021, 17:01 Josh Luthman, wrote:
> Do you have any v4 addresses? If so, why don't you do 100% v6 and then
> sell your v4 space for some extra cheddar?
>
Rather than sell v4, why not return to the registry for free for
reallocation to those resource members with need.?
Cheers,
William Herrin wrote:
I did some math on this years ago and it worked out to about 8.5
million IPv4 routes.
It should be 14M.
Worse, it will be reached unless we stop doing multihoming by
routing, which is selfish.
Masataka Ohta
Yes, it is bad practice. Yes, it's polluting the route table.
If the # of /24s involved is not ridiculously large (say, <64?) them I would go
ahead, as long as IRR and/or RPKI are also updated.
Obviously if everyone did it (i.e. advertising /24s exclusively) then our FIBs
would collectively
On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 19:07, Martijn Schmidt via NANOG wrote:
> It's route table pollution if you ask me.. in today's world we have many
> IXPs and several tier-1 operators that support RPKI ROV, so when you
> have issued ROAs for the supernet of the IP space in question it'll
> already
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 8:48 AM Billy Croan wrote:
> How does the community feel about using /24 originations in BGP as a
> tactical advantage against potential bgp hijackers?
> How many routers out there today would be affected if everyone did this?
Hi Billy,
I did some math on this years ago
It's route table pollution if you ask me.. in today's world we have many
IXPs and several tier-1 operators that support RPKI ROV, so when you
have issued ROAs for the supernet of the IP space in question it'll
already significantly reduce the effects of a BGP hijack.
Best regards,
Martijn
On
How does the community feel about using /24 originations in BGP as a
tactical advantage against potential bgp hijackers?
All of our allocations are larger and those prefixes we announce for
clients as well usually are. But we had a request recently to
originate everything as distinct /24
Do you have any v4 addresses? If so, why don't you do 100% v6 and then
sell your v4 space for some extra cheddar?
Josh Luthman
24/7 Help Desk: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sat, Aug 7, 2021 at 12:04 AM Musa Stephen Honlue
wrote:
> Why don’t you
> >> Someone that poses as a Tier-1 and doesn't even plan to sign their
> >> announcements ? How much more depeering will make them reconsider ?
>
> Please keep in mind that sound technical, administrative, or financial
> reasons can exist that hamper one's ability to create RPKI ROAs.
>
> For
Dear Rubens,
On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 08:41:48AM -0300, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
> From a Cogent support ticket:
>> Please see the attached LOA.
>>
>> Regarding the RPKI ROA, for now, we don't create ROA for our prefixes
>> nor for prefixes that we assign to our customers and we don't plan to
>> do it.
It won't get them depeered, nor should it. I don't currently based much
value in RPKI for BGP.
On Mon., Aug. 9, 2021, 8:43 a.m. Rubens Kuhl, wrote:
> From a Cogent support ticket:
> "Hello,
>
> Please see the attached LOA.
>
> Regarding the RPKI ROA, for now, we don't create ROA for our
>From a Cogent support ticket:
"Hello,
Please see the attached LOA.
Regarding the RPKI ROA, for now, we don't create ROA for our prefixes
nor for prefixes that we assign to our customers and we don't plan to
do it. Unfortunately, this is not an option."
Someone that poses as a Tier-1 and
26 matches
Mail list logo
