route-views.oregon-ix.net>sh ip bgp 169.223.0.0 BGP routing table entry for 168.0.0.0/6, version 7688303 Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table) Not advertised to any peer 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 194.85.4.249 from 194.85.4.249 (194.85.4.249) Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external, best ripe is being overgenerous to the swiss!
On 24.02 23:20, Randy Bush wrote:
BGP routing table entry for 168.0.0.0/6, version 7688303 ... 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 194.85.4.249 from 194.85.4.249 (194.85.4.249) Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external, best
ripe is being overgenerous to the swiss!
Not so. They are pretending to be over-endowed to some peers only. Isn't that something to notify AS3303 aka SWISSCOM about rather than NANOG? Especially since it does not look like it is spreading very widely. Daniel
On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 04:36:03PM +0100, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
On 24.02 23:20, Randy Bush wrote:
BGP routing table entry for 168.0.0.0/6, version 7688303 ... 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 194.85.4.249 from 194.85.4.249 (194.85.4.249) Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external, best
ripe is being overgenerous to the swiss!
Not so. They are pretending to be over-endowed to some peers only.
Not so, as has been re-re-re-hashed, 3303 is sending bogon feeds to some parties [presumably their customers] and those are getting regurgitated to route-views. route-views is a varied slice of different kinds of announcement sets (full tables, partial, internal deaggs, ect etc); looking-glass comparison shopping is the only way to get meaningful data. -- RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE
BGP routing table entry for 168.0.0.0/6, version 7688303 ... 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 194.85.4.249 from 194.85.4.249 (194.85.4.249) Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external, best
ripe is being overgenerous to the swiss!
Not so. They are pretending to be over-endowed to some peers only.
Not so, as has been re-re-re-hashed, 3303 is sending bogon feeds to some parties [presumably their customers] and those are getting regurgitated to route-views. route-views is a varied slice of different kinds of announcement sets (full tables, partial, internal deaggs, ect etc); looking-glass comparison shopping is the only way to get meaningful data.
the problem is that those getting the over-reaching data have a view of the internet which can cause them and some destinations problems. this is very analogous to seeing 0/0 with a six hop path in route-views, as you say, we don't really know the reach of the bad data. randy
Isn't that something to notify AS3303 aka SWISSCOM about rather than NANOG?
perhaps because this path has been taken in the past and failed?
Especially since it does not look like it is spreading very widely.
hard to tell, isn't it. and hard to say the effect on the places to which it has spread. randy
At 07:39 AM 25-02-04 +0800, Randy Bush wrote:
Isn't that something to notify AS3303 aka SWISSCOM about rather than NANOG?
perhaps because this path has been taken in the past and failed?
Especially since it does not look like it is spreading very widely.
hard to tell, isn't it. and hard to say the effect on the places to which it has spread.
I have previously contacted Swisscom about it back in 9/2003 and received the following response:
we are filtering on RIR minimal allocation boundaries. This creates some routing holes which we fill by these semi-default routes (towards our upstreams) for our customers' perusal.
Fixedorbit had to special case Swisscom since they came out in their IP table as the #1 IP holder. That honor is now held by DISO. -Hank
I have previously contacted Swisscom about it back in 9/2003 and received the following response:
we are filtering on RIR minimal allocation boundaries. This creates some routing holes which we fill by these semi-default routes (towards our upstreams) for our customers' perusal.
luckily, things like this are never leaked into the open internet by multi-homed customers and weak filtering policies. </sarcasm> randy
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:20:30 +0800, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> said:
route-views.oregon-ix.net>sh ip bgp 169.223.0.0 BGP routing table entry for 168.0.0.0/6, version 7688303
OK, any bets on how much improperly ingress/egress filtered traffic to 169.254/16 this is going to attract? ;)
Hi Randy, Actually you only discovered the emerged part of the iceberg ... Cheers, André *> 24.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 60.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 62.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 63.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 64.0.0.0/6 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 68.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 70.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 80.0.0.0/6 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 84.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 128.0.0.0/3 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 160.0.0.0/5 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 168.0.0.0/6 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 199.0.0.0/8 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 200.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 202.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 204.0.0.0/6 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 208.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 210.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 212.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 216.0.0.0/8 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 217.0.0.0/8 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 218.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 220.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 222.0.0.0/8 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i ----- Original Message ----- From: "Randy Bush" <randy@psg.com> To: <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 4:20 PM Subject: 168.0.0.0/6 route-views.oregon-ix.net>sh ip bgp 169.223.0.0 BGP routing table entry for 168.0.0.0/6, version 7688303 Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table) Not advertised to any peer 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 194.85.4.249 from 194.85.4.249 (194.85.4.249) Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external, best ripe is being overgenerous to the swiss!
route-views.oregon-ix.net>sh ip bgp 169.223.0.0 BGP routing table entry for 168.0.0.0/6, version 7688303 Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table) Not advertised to any peer 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 194.85.4.249 from 194.85.4.249 (194.85.4.249) Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external, best
*> 24.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 60.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 62.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 63.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 64.0.0.0/6 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 68.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 70.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 80.0.0.0/6 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 84.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 128.0.0.0/3 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 160.0.0.0/5 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 168.0.0.0/6 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 199.0.0.0/8 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 200.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 202.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 204.0.0.0/6 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 208.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 210.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 212.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 216.0.0.0/8 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 217.0.0.0/8 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 218.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 220.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 222.0.0.0/8 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i
this seems to cause some strangeness when one's block is having various announcement problems and falls within swisscom's imperialistic reach. is cousin george doing their routing policy? :-) randy
This has been mentioned on nanog maillist before, it appears several months after notification swisscom still has not fixed this problem (when similar leak came from he, I think they fixed it in 48 hours!). Here are pointers to previous thread: http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/2003-11/msg00626.html http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/2003-11/msg00636.html On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Randy Bush wrote:
route-views.oregon-ix.net>sh ip bgp 169.223.0.0 BGP routing table entry for 168.0.0.0/6, version 7688303 Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table) Not advertised to any peer 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 194.85.4.249 from 194.85.4.249 (194.85.4.249) Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external, best
*> 24.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 60.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 62.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 63.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 64.0.0.0/6 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 68.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 70.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 80.0.0.0/6 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 84.0.0.0 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 128.0.0.0/3 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 160.0.0.0/5 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 168.0.0.0/6 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 199.0.0.0/8 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 200.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 202.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 204.0.0.0/6 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 208.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 210.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 212.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 216.0.0.0/8 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 217.0.0.0/8 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 218.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 220.0.0.0/7 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i *> 222.0.0.0/8 194.85.4.249 0 3277 13062 20485 20485 20485 8437 3303 i
this seems to cause some strangeness when one's block is having various announcement problems and falls within swisscom's imperialistic reach. is cousin george doing their routing policy? :-)
randy
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- william(at)elan.net wrote:
This has been mentioned on nanog maillist before, it appears several months after notification swisscom still has not fixed this problem(when similar leak came from he, I think they fixed it in 48 hours!). Here are pointers to previous thread: http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/2003-11/msg00626.html http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/2003-11/msg00636.html
I guess SWISSCOM (AS3303) has a nice trackrecord to uphold: http://mailman.isi.edu/pipermail/6bone/2002-December/006924.html Added the persons who where able to fix that problem that time, maybe it helps this time too ;) Greets, Jeroen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Unfix PGP for Outlook Alpha 13 Int. Comment: Jeroen Massar / http://unfix.org/~jeroen iQA/AwUBQDvhUCmqKFIzPnwjEQJjoQCeKEEnysAMLazSQvmvbgVk/3VzpC0AoKo0 FfK/Yg1TKAFJGbt1AyjR+5Jh =DtY/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (8)
-
Andre Chapuis -
Daniel Karrenberg -
Hank Nussbacher -
Jeroen Massar -
Joe Provo -
Randy Bush -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu -
william(at)elan.net