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

Mie Mar 4 15:16:17 GMT+3 2020

Excelente que soporta la creación de as-sets.

Tenía la percepción que solo soportaba la sintetizacion de objetos a través
de RPKI.

Gracias por la aclaración!

Saludos

On Wed, 4 Mar 2020, 15:55 Nicolas Antoniello, <nantoniello en gmail.com> wrote:

> Desde mi punto de vista, para que nos quede más claro a todos y en la
> misma línea que menciona Carlos:
>
> - Entiendo que el IRR desarrollado por Lacnic si soporta la creación de
> AS-SETs.
> - Lo de generar automáticamente AS-SETs para los clientes se me ocurre
> muuuuuy difícil sin meterse y conocer la red del cliente... no recuerdo
> IRRs que lo hagan automáticamente... ni IRRs (sin ser el de Lacnic) que
> genere prácticamente nada automáticamente.
>
> Saludos,
> Nico
>
>
>
> El El mié, mar. 4, 2020 a la(s) 11:40, Carlos M. Martinez <
> carlosm3011 en gmail.com> escribió:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just a clarification: LACNIC’s IRR does support AS-SETs, but
>> operators/users need to create them.
>>
>> Our IRR is “mostly automatic” in the sense that route/route6 objects and
>> maintainers are synthesized based on RPKI and WHOIS data.
>>
>> However, unlike route/route6 and maintainers, our IRR cannot synthesize
>> AS-SETs for our users.
>>
>> Our IRR is still in its infancy (it has been in production for less than
>> three months) but I hope when the word gets out we will see significant
>> uptake of this tool.
>>
>> If there are any specific, architectural or service questions regarding
>> LACNIC’s IRR please refer directly to us LACNIC staff.
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>> /Carlos
>>
>> On 3 Mar 2020, at 9:00, Arturo Servin wrote:
>>
>> 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
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LACNOG mailing list
>> LACNOG en lacnic.net
>> https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>> Cancelar suscripcion: https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LACNOG mailing list
>> LACNOG en lacnic.net
>> https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog
>> Cancelar suscripcion: https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200304/7eba0fe2/attachment.html>