AS 3356 (Level 3) -- Community 3356:666
There is an old NANOG thread from 2005 that said AS 3356 (Level 3) were applying 3356:666 to indicate Peer route: https://archive.nanog.org/mailinglist/mailarchives/old_archive/2005-12/msg00... Also, see: https://onestep.net/communities/as3356/ Now network operators commonly use ASN:666 for BGP Blackholing Community. (ASN = the operator's AS number) See, for example, https://www.he.net/adm/blackhole.html Does anyone know if AS 3356 has changed how it uses 3356:666? I.e., is it known if they now use it for Blackholing Community? Thank you. Sriram
$ whois AS3356 -h rr.level3.net | grep -E 'blackhol|666' remarks:Â Â Â Â Â Â 3356:666 - Peer route remarks:Â Â Â Â Â Â 3356:9999 - blackhole (discard) traffic -- Patrick Am 04.08.2021 um 15:28 schrieb Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) via NANOG:
There is an old NANOG thread from 2005 that said AS 3356 (Level 3) were applying 3356:666 to indicate Peer route: https://archive.nanog.org/mailinglist/mailarchives/old_archive/2005-12/msg00... Also, see: https://onestep.net/communities/as3356/
Now network operators commonly use ASN:666 for BGP Blackholing Community. (ASN = the operator's AS number) See, for example, https://www.he.net/adm/blackhole.html
Does anyone know if AS 3356 has changed how it uses 3356:666? I.e., is it known if they now use it for Blackholing Community?
Thank you.
Sriram
And it's also nice not to yank the old community in case your customers still depend on it, even if you do also support the RFC version as an alias of that one.
That seems to be the case. Also, possibly the use of WKC 65535:666 has not picked up much. We observe that out of a total of 264,557 unique {Prefix, AS Path, Community = Any:666} seen in a whole day's worth of BGP Updates from RIPE-RIS (July 15, 2021), only 21 are with 65535:666. See slide 12 here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/111/materials/slides-111-grow-bgp-regul... (presentation at the IETF 111 GROW meeting last week) Sriram
Hello, there's exactly *one* blackhole well-known community, which should be used for this purpose - 65535:666 (standardised in RFC 7999). There's no reason to use even "ASN:666" format these days... - Daniel On 8/4/21 3:28 PM, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) via NANOG wrote:
There is an old NANOG thread from 2005 that said AS 3356 (Level 3) were applying 3356:666 to indicate Peer route: https://archive.nanog.org/mailinglist/mailarchives/old_archive/2005-12/msg00... Also, see: https://onestep.net/communities/as3356/
Now network operators commonly use ASN:666 for BGP Blackholing Community. (ASN = the operator's AS number) See, for example, https://www.he.net/adm/blackhole.html
Does anyone know if AS 3356 has changed how it uses 3356:666? I.e., is it known if they now use it for Blackholing Community?
Thank you.
Sriram
Unless, of course, your BGP policy was written long before that RFC was established and you didn't think it was worth the config upgrade to support something that had been in use since around 1998 or so :) -Steve On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 10:27 AM Daniel Suchy via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote:
Hello, there's exactly *one* blackhole well-known community, which should be used for this purpose - 65535:666 (standardised in RFC 7999). There's no reason to use even "ASN:666" format these days...
- Daniel
On 8/4/21 3:28 PM, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) via NANOG wrote:
There is an old NANOG thread from 2005 that said AS 3356 (Level 3) were applying 3356:666 to indicate Peer route:
https://archive.nanog.org/mailinglist/mailarchives/old_archive/2005-12/msg00...
Also, see: https://onestep.net/communities/as3356/
Now network operators commonly use ASN:666 for BGP Blackholing Community. (ASN = the operator's AS number) See, for example, https://www.he.net/adm/blackhole.html
Does anyone know if AS 3356 has changed how it uses 3356:666? I.e., is it known if they now use it for Blackholing Community?
Thank you.
Sriram
And it's also nice not to yank the old community in case your customers still depend on it, even if you do also support the RFC version as an alias of that one. Best regards, Martijn ________________________________ From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+martijnschmidt=i3d.net@nanog.org> on behalf of Steve Meuse <smeuse@mara.org> Sent: 04 August 2021 17:55 To: Daniel Suchy <danny@danysek.cz> Cc: nanog@nanog.org <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: AS 3356 (Level 3) -- Community 3356:666 Unless, of course, your BGP policy was written long before that RFC was established and you didn't think it was worth the config upgrade to support something that had been in use since around 1998 or so :) -Steve On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 10:27 AM Daniel Suchy via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> wrote: Hello, there's exactly *one* blackhole well-known community, which should be used for this purpose - 65535:666 (standardised in RFC 7999). There's no reason to use even "ASN:666" format these days... - Daniel On 8/4/21 3:28 PM, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) via NANOG wrote:
There is an old NANOG thread from 2005 that said AS 3356 (Level 3) were applying 3356:666 to indicate Peer route: https://archive.nanog.org/mailinglist/mailarchives/old_archive/2005-12/msg00... Also, see: https://onestep.net/communities/as3356/
Now network operators commonly use ASN:666 for BGP Blackholing Community. (ASN = the operator's AS number) See, for example, https://www.he.net/adm/blackhole.html
Does anyone know if AS 3356 has changed how it uses 3356:666? I.e., is it known if they now use it for Blackholing Community?
Thank you.
Sriram
* Martijn Schmidt [Wed 04 Aug 2021, 18:01 CEST]:
And it's also nice not to yank the old community in case your customers still depend on it, even if you do also support the RFC version as an alias of that one.
Note that 3356:666 is applied on ingress to routes received from peers. They could easily rewrite their import policy to translate any 3356:666 to 3356:9999 before passing it on to their RTBH systems, without impacting previous consumers of 3356:666 among their BGP customers. -- Niels.
participants (6)
-
Daniel Suchy -
Martijn Schmidt -
Niels Bakker -
Patrick Schultz -
Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) -
Steve Meuse