Hi Vivek and Anupam b,
On the point that why the policy will not be enforced on the existing
non-hierarchical AS-SET as mentioned in the impact section.

6. Impact on resource holders
-----------------------------
APNIC has to request members to update their non hierarchical as-set
as a new recommended policy. No changes will be enforced to existing
non hierarchical as-set.

The purpose of this policy is to make sure that no APNIC member
intentionally or unintentionally create an unauthenticated AS-SET, while
the existing non-hierarchical AS-SET pose security issue for AS-SET holder
but it doesn't create any problem for any other resource holders. Thats why
it should be informed to all resource holders that their AS-SETs are
vulnerable to name collision attacks from other non-authenticated IRR
databases but APNIC shouldn't delete them.

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui


On Wed, 22 Feb 2023 at 10:13, Aftab Siddiqui <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Satoru san,
> I appreciate the feedback from the JP community. I do understand some of
> the points you have raised, I will be doing a detailed technical
> presentation during the Routing Security SIG to discuss most of the issues
> you have raised here. I would request you and other friends from the
> community to attend the routing security SIG.
>
> Regards,
>
> Aftab A. Siddiqui
>
>
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 22:43, Satoru Tsurumaki <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Dear Colleagues,
>>
>> I am Satoru Tsurumaki from Japan Open Policy Forum Steering Team..
>>
>> I would like to share key feedback in our community for prop-151,
>> based on a meeting we organised on 15th Feb to discuss these proposals.
>>
>> Many participants support the intent of this proposal, but do not believe
>> it should be discussed in Policy SIG.
>>
>> (comment details)
>> - I agree with the purpose of the proposal, but I wonder if it is not
>>   something that should be discussed in the sig policy.
>>
>> - I think the problem is how to determine which AS number to permit.
>>
>> - I do not oppose this proposal, but I do not think we should have
>>   excessive expectations of IRR.
>>
>>  - This proposal should be discussed globally by MANRS or others,
>>    not by APNIC Policy SIG.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Satoru Tsurumaki / JPOPF Steering Team
>>
>> 2023年1月20日(金) 9:25 Bertrand Cherrier <[email protected]>:
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Dear SIG members,
>> >
>> > The proposal "prop-151: Restricting non hierarchical as-set" has been
>> > sent to
>> > the Policy SIG for review.
>> >
>> > It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting (OPM) at APNIC 55 on
>> > Wednesday, 1 March 2023.
>> >
>> > https://conference.apnic.net/55/program/schedule/#/day/10
>> >
>> > We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list
>> > before the OPM.
>> >
>> > The comment period on the mailing list before the OPM is an important
>> > part of the Policy Development Process (PDP). We encourage you to
>> > express your views on the proposal:
>> >
>> >    - Do you support or oppose this proposal?
>> >    - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
>> >      tell the community about your situation.
>> >    - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
>> >    - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
>> >    - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
>> effective?
>> >
>> > Information about this proposal is appended below as well as available
>> at:
>> >
>> > http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-151
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Bertrand, Shaila, and Anupam
>> > APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
>> >
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > prop-151-v001: Restricting non hierarchical as-set
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > Proposer: Aftab Siddiqui ([email protected])
>> >
>> >
>> > 1. Problem statement
>> > --------------------
>> > An as-set (RFC 2622 Section 5.1) provides a way to document the
>> > relationship between ASes which can then be publicly verified. RFC2622
>> > further defines 2 categories for as-set which can be Hierarchical or Non
>> > Hierarchical. A hierarchical set name is a sequence of set names and AS
>> > numbers separated by colons ‘:’ e.g. AS4826:AS-VOCUS
>> >
>> > Non hierarchical as-set pose a security issue where any one can create
>> > an as-set without any authentication or authorisation e.g. any member
>> > can create AS-FACEBOOK (if available) without authorisation from
>> > Facebook. Since many peering filters are based on as-set, creating a
>> > blank as-set or as-set with wrong members can cause automated filters to
>> > apply empty prefix-filters to BGP session.
>> >
>> >
>> > 2. Objective of policy change
>> > -----------------------------
>> > Restrict APNIC members to create non hierarchical as-set and notify all
>> > members who already have non hierarchical as-set that it is recommended
>> > to move them to hierarchical as-set.
>> >
>> >
>> > 3. Situation in other regions
>> > -----------------------------
>> > - RIPE NCC has recently implemented restriction of non hierarchical
>> as-set
>> > - LACNIC IRR supports only hierarchical as-set
>> >
>> >
>> > 4. Proposed policy solution
>> > ---------------------------
>> > APNIC members are only allowed to create hierarchical as-set. As defined
>> > in the RFC2622 Section 5 "A hierarchical set name is a sequence of set
>> > names and AS numbers separated by colons ":". At least one component of
>> > such a name must be an actual set name (i.e. start with one of the
>> > prefixes above).  All the set name components of an hierarchical name
>> > has to be of the same type."
>> >
>> > An as-set object with name AS65536:...... can only be created by the
>> > maintainer of the AS65536. Therefore, this must be the only allowed
>> > structure for hierarchical as-set.
>> >
>> > Any non hierarchical as-set can not be used as a parent to create a
>> > hierarchical as-set e.g. AS-AFTAB (non hierarchical as-set) should not
>> > be allowed to create AS-AFTAB:AS141384 (hierarchical as-set).
>> >
>> >
>> > 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
>> > -----------------------------
>> > Advantages:
>> > This will protect members from intentional or unintentional creation of
>> > as-set which already exist in other IRR databases creating name
>> collision.
>> >
>> > Disadvantages:
>> > Overhead for APNIC to notify existing non hierarchical as-set
>> > maintainers about the policy update.
>> >
>> >
>> > 6. Impact on resource holders
>> > -----------------------------
>> > APNIC has to request members to update their non hierarchical as-set as
>> > a new recommended policy. No changes will be enforced to existing non
>> > hierarchical as-set.
>> >
>> >
>> > 7. References
>> > -------------
>> > - Thanks to Job Snijders, Nick Hilliard and other community members on
>> > for providing in depth details on various platforms.
>> > - RIPE db-wg proposal:
>> > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2022-November/007646.html
>> > - IRRd 4 update: https://github.com/irrdnet/irrd/issues/408
>> > -
>> >
>> https://www.manrs.org/2022/12/why-network-operators-should-use-hierarchical-as-sets/
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > sig-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
>> > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>> _______________________________________________
>> sig-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
>
_______________________________________________
sig-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to