Hi Vincent,

I´d suggest to create each route object for each announced prefix...
If you did it right, you should see irrexplorer for your ASN in green only:
http://irrexplorer.nlnog.net/search/61098 (looks excellent)
IMHO you are very right - there are for sure networks out there, which will 
filter 
your prefixes, when you do not have a matching route object entry ...

Bernd

-----Original Message-----
From: swinog-boun...@lists.swinog.ch [mailto:swinog-boun...@lists.swinog.ch] On 
Behalf Of Vincent Bernat
Sent: Montag, 20. November 2017 11:03
To: swi...@swinog.ch
Subject: [swinog] RIPE database and more specific routes

Hey!

I am updating the route/inetnum objects in the RIPE database and I am wondering 
if I have to create more specific route objects. For example, I have the 
following routes announced:

 - 89.145.160.0/21
 - 89.145.160.0/22 (FR7)
 - 89.145.164.0/23 (DK2)
 - 89.145.166.0/23 (GV2)

Each more specific route is announced in a different location. Should I create 
only the top route object or should I create a route object for each announce?

If I look at bgpq3, I see by default, it uses exact matches:

$ bgpq3 -4 -J -E AS61098 | grep 89.145
    route-filter 89.145.160.0/21 exact;
    route-filter 89.145.160.0/22 exact;
    route-filter 89.145.164.0/23 exact;
    route-filter 89.145.166.0/23 exact;

However, I use it this way:

$ bgpq3 -R 24 -4 -J -E AS61098 | grep 89.145
    route-filter 89.145.160.0/21 upto /24;

But I am concerned some people may build filters using only exact matches, so 
it seems safer to have route objects for more specifics.
--
If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a 
merrier world.
                -- J.R.R. Tolkien


_______________________________________________
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog


_______________________________________________
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

Antwort per Email an