Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: preventing future situations like panix

  • From: Josh Karlin
  • Date: Mon Jan 23 18:43:08 2006
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=PAFBOV99F4mMKNnE4m7NKWS4236soKEHQmsdyK/7oALNP5Fkec+WRR9aUZ3mG97AXIG2VUM35cbUIvjBZ1uFgJUIouE06P5pPzPpFIuU3rZXqb8WBTS6v8L6hSUwJO9pGMX4ncLVf3bk9pXsWu40RNevFKvt3eKGgdJe/0IlU0g=

> To what extent does the route object validation in the RIPE database
> (for routes covering RIPE-allocated space), together with maintainer
> object authentication, provide a "perfect IRR", according to your
> research?
>
> (I realise the step from "useful, authenticated source of data" to
> "universally-deployed import filters" is non-trivial.)

My understanding is that RIPE, while quite good, still contains a
significant amount of old data that needs to be regularly flushed.  It
certainly seems reasonable to use its information as a good first
approximation of the validity of a route, and I think that would go
quite well with our recommendation, reducing the number of routes
flagged as suspicious.




Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.