In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Larry Blunk writes: > > > The ROA presentation mentioned the option of using > "RPSL" for expressing prefix ranges. I just wanted > to make it clear that my suggestion was to borrow the > "RPSL Range Operator" expression syntax for prefix ranges. > This is a very small subset of the RPSL standard. > > There were comments in the meeting that it would not be possible > to employ large scale BGP filtering (i.e. on non-customer peering sessions). > There has been some research to suggest that such filtering may in > fact be feasible on modern day routers. See -- > http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0510/deleskie.html > > -Larry
Larry, It was always feasible in "modern routers". There was just a time when not everyone making routers made modern routers. :-) Its more of an operational problem maintaining the prefix lists based on a external database or other OOB means. Some providers can deal with it, others feel that they can't. Religion may play a role here. The other issue is database coverage and accuracy. Fitting prefix lists into memory on the router, searching them quickly, and relatively fast non-disruptive update has been possible for well over a decade or just under a decade on some widely used commercial routers. A simplistic view is that SIDR is just changing the way the prefix list is populated and hopefully will change the coverage and accuracy. Curtis _______________________________________________ Sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
