WG Chair hat off
On 18/11/2008, at 8:01 AM, Matt Lepinski wrote:
Two issues came up during the ROA Format presentation at IETF 73:
1) Should the ROA Format draft explicitly prohibit a ROA with
overlapping prefixes?
(E.g. A ROA that says AS # 1 can originate routes to 10/8, 10.10/16
and 10.20/16)
What do you mean by overlap Matt?
a) 10.0.0.0/8 maxlength=9 and 10.0.0.0/24 maxlength=24
or
b) 10.0.0.0/8 maxlength=24 and 10.0.0.0/16 maxlength=16
or
c) 10.0.0.0/8 maxlength=17 and 10.0.0.0/16 maxlength=24
seems to me that b) is the only case where the second item is
completely subsumed by the first, yet all three contain "overlapping
prefixes"
It also seems to me that all these cases are essentially harmless.
My opinion is NOT to put this prohibition into the document, assuming
of course that there is some clarity over what is meant precisely by
"overlapping prefixes" in the first place
Geoff
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
