Perhaps these should be considered for informative text in an I-D. -andy
On 11/25/08 8:39 PM, "Geoff Huston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sure. So here's some use cases of BOAs: > > 1. I have been allocated 203.10.61.0/24. I do not use it today in any > public routing context. It should not appear in BGP at all. I do not > give my authorization to any AS to originate a route for this prefix, > or any more specific of this prefix. If I generate a BOA for > 203.10.61.0/24 then my intention of saying that any use of this prefix > in the public Internet is unauthorized is clear. > > 2. I have been allocated AS 131074 as an AS number. I do not use it > today in any public routing context. It should not appear in BGP at > all either as an origination AS nor as a transit AS in any AS path. If > I generate a BOA for AS131074 then my intention of saying that any use > of this AS number in the public Internet is unauthorized is clear. > > 3. I have been allocated 203.10.60.0/22. I wish to ensure that any > more specific advertisement of this prefix is unauthorized. If I > generate a BOA for 203.10.60.0/23 AND 203.10.62.0/23 then my intention > is clear. > > And a non-use case of BOAs: > > 4. I am a wholesale ISP, and while I allocate address space to my > clients from my aggregate address block (10.0.0.0/8) I also permit my > clients to use their more specific prefix at local exchanges. My AS > number is 131072 and I have generated a ROA for 10.0.0.0/8 , > maxlength=8 origin AS 131072. I do not have a problem with more > specifics of 10.0.0.0/8 being used in routing contexts, as part of my > wholesale stance. I would prefer that my ROA did not cause my > customer's more specifics to be treated as unauthorized routes, > irrespective of whether they are ready to use a ROA today or not. _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
