[lacnog] Mess up - IRR de prefixos brasileiros - EMIX(ChinaTel) - Neustar - Internexa

[Arturo Servin]

Douglas

Thanks for getting this stats and bringing awareness that there is a lot to
do in LATAM.

I have these stats that I have presented in some fora in the past few
months, these represent the percentage of valid prefixes (according to IRR
data.) As you can see LATAM (69.11%) is way behind the rest of the regions
and the global average of 86%.We are working to include LACNIC IRR so stats
might improve soon but I am not sure how much as the IRR does not have
AS-SETs and I would bet that a good chunk of invalid are coming from ASs
that provide transit services to other ASNs (so AS-origin is not enough to
validate.)

[image: Initial Experiences Route Filtering at the Edge AS15169.png]

Some places to check your prefixes:

   - IRR Explorer NLNOG: http://irrexplorer.nlnog.net/
   - RIPE RIS Routing Consistency:
   https://stat.ripe.net/widget/as-routing-consistency


Finally, Google is in the process to start filtering all invalid prefixes
that do not match any IRR entry, so I recommend that if you peer with
AS15169 you take a look if your prefixes are validated (Google ISP Portal
https://isp.google.com/bgp/ and check your AS-SET in PeeringDB)

Regards
as






On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 9:39 PM Douglas Fischer <fischerdouglas en gmail.com>
wrote:

> Acabei de criar mais uma visão sumarizada de quem está criando sujeira nos
> IRRs, especificamente nos prefixos brasileiros.
>  ->
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1RXqzCP2uN-dZ1hRkridm4EBg4_6tYC09Y8ZAW68JSf8/
> Esse arquivo nos mostra or Objetos IRR Route: e Route6: classificados com
> INVALID e UNEEDED em 2020-03-01
>
> O 5 maintainers que mais tem criados registros INVALID de prefixos BR são:
> Maint          | Name                   | INVALID | UNEEDED |
> MAINT-AS8966   | Emirates IX - ChinaTel |    2511 |       2 |
> MAINT-AS7786   | NeuStar                |     887 |         |
> MAINT-AS18678  | Internexa              |     670 |     605 |
> MAINT-SAMM     | SAMM CCR               |     140 |      80 |
> MAINT-NRT-BB   | NOROESTECOM            |      60 |       3 |
>
> P.S.:
> Procedimento de como se chegou a essas informações detalhado nessa troca
> de e-mail
> https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/2020-February/007809.html
>
>
> Eu preciso agradecer e parabenizar as equipes das empresas:
>  - G8 Networks
>  - Nexusguard
> Desde a análise que eu havia feito no dia 13-Feb-2019 [1] tive a
> oportunidade de conversar com pessoas dessas duas empresas, e eles fizeram
> esforços e corrigiram/eliminaram grande parte dos registros incorretos que
> eles haviam criados.
> Esta, em minha opinião, deve ser a postura de operadores de rede. Estando
> abertos a informações, validando, e corrigindo se cabível.
>
>
>
>
> [1]
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XxUI2_JcKgkg5CniRi1E3ieEu9HgRJCfYfaH3hTIaHg/
>
> --
> Douglas Fernando Fischer
> Engº de Controle e Automação
> _______________________________________________
> LACNOG mailing list
> LACNOG en lacnic.net
> https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
> Cancelar suscripcion: https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog
>
------------ próxima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/attachments/20200303/39f19dad/attachment-0001.html>
------------ próxima parte ------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Initial Experiences Route Filtering at the Edge AS15169.png
Type: image/png
Size: 33617 bytes
Desc: no disponible
URL: <https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/attachments/20200303/39f19dad/attachment-0001.png>