Jay:

>When we (as7018) were preparing to begin dropping invalid routes

>received from peers earlier this year, that is exactly the kind of

>analysis we did.  In our case we rolled our own with a two-pass

>process: we first found all the traffic to/from invalid routes by a

>bgp community we gave them, then outside of our flow analysis tool we

>further filtered the traffic for invalid routes which were covered by

>less-specific not-invalid routes.  What remained was the traffic we

>would lose once invalid routes were dropped.  Had the pmacct

>capability existed at that time, we would have used it.

We (NIST) did a detailed analysis of Invalid routes (with Routeviews data)

that was presented at IETF 101:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-sidrops-origin-validation-policy-considerations-for-dropping-invalid-routes-00

See slides 10-13. We tried to drill down on Invalid routes which were covered by

less-specific not-invalid routes. We examined questions like:

how often does the less-specific route have the same origin AS (OAS) as the Invalid,

and, if not, then how frequently is the OAS of the less specific route

a transit provider of the OAS of the Invalid route?

We plan to update the results periodically.  

Sriram