[lacnog] IX LAN Prefixes - Should I Automate a Discard?

[Job Snijders]

Dear Douglas,

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 01:40:04PM -0400, Douglas Fischer wrote:
> OK, RPKI is the Better solution... And We should not stop it!
> But:
>  - Supposing we are in 25-30% of operational ASNs doing RPKI validation.
>  - And also supposing we will take 2-3 years to reach a percentual that
> almost eliminates propagations of invalids...
> Will we be without protection against Fat-Finger during this time?

Well, the incentives are very much aligned with the network that
considers the deployment: if you care about this type of problem you can
easily protect yourself, if you choose to not deploy RPKI OV your ASN
may face more outages.

> As you Mentioned "Route-Set:" looks a simple and effective idea! And "AS0"
> and ÏRRs dos not combine.
> But to create a Route-Set:RS-IXPsAroundTheWorld we need that the "Route:"
> and "Route6:" already created.

The depency is not correct, you can create a "route-set:" with arbritary
content, no "route:" objects need to exist.

I'm snipping the rest of your email since it seems based on the premise
that "route:" objects need to exist.

Kind regards,

Job