AS2548... Do you care?
08/07/01 Internet Routing Problems Reserved AS Numbers ------------------- AS64620 at Mae-West from Digex (AS2548) ASPATH=2548 64620 20246 20246 IGP 08/08/01 Internet Routing Problems Reserved AS Numbers ------------------- AS64620 at Mae-West from Digex (AS2548) ASPATH=2548 64620 20246 20246 IGP 08/09/01 Internet Routing Problems Reserved AS Numbers ------------------- AS64620 at Mae-West from Digex (AS2548) ASPATH=2548 64620 20246 20246 IGP 08/10/01 Internet Routing Problems Reserved AS Numbers ------------------- AS64620 at Mae-West from Digex (AS2548) ASPATH=2548 64620 20246 20246 IGP And it's still there right now: (results from nitrous.digex.net) BGP routing table entry for 199.253.174.0/24, version 31188140 Paths: (3 available, best #3) Advertised to peer-groups: rr-pop maeeast-atm 64620 20246 20246 209.116.242.118 (metric 215601) from 165.117.1.53 (165.117.2.30) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 110, valid, internal Community: 2548:999 3706:130 Originator: 165.117.2.30, Cluster list: 165.117.1.53 64620 20246 20246 209.116.242.118 (metric 215601) from 165.117.1.228 (165.117.2.30) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 110, valid, internal Community: 2548:999 3706:130 Originator: 165.117.2.30, Cluster list: 165.117.1.228 64620 20246 20246 216.1.71.34 (metric 105501) from 165.117.1.77 (165.117.1.77) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 110, valid, internal, best Community: 2548:999 3706:132 BGP routing table entry for 199.253.174.0/24, version 35137771 Paths: (3 available, best #3) Advertised to peer-groups: pen-nap1 Advertised to non peer-group peers: 192.157.69.9 192.157.69.10 192.157.69.22 192.157.69.63 64620 20246 20246 209.116.242.118 (metric 210201) from 165.117.1.53 (165.117.2.30) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 110, valid, internal Community: 2548:999 3706:130 Originator: 165.117.2.30, Cluster list: 165.117.1.53 64620 20246 20246 209.116.242.118 (metric 210201) from 165.117.1.228 (165.117.2.30) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 110, valid, internal Community: 2548:999 3706:130 Originator: 165.117.2.30, Cluster list: 165.117.1.228 64620 20246 20246 216.1.71.34 (metric 100101) from 165.117.1.77 (165.117.1.77) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 110, valid, internal, best Community: 2548:999 3706:132 BGP routing table entry for 199.253.174.0/24, version 32354441 Paths: (3 available, best #3) Advertised to peer-groups: rr-pop maewest Advertised to non peer-group peers: 198.32.136.1 198.32.136.2 198.32.136.11 198.32.136.31 198.32.136.129 64620 20246 20246 209.116.242.118 (metric 450701) from 165.117.1.53 (165.117.2.30) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 110, valid, internal Community: 2548:999 3706:130 Originator: 165.117.2.30, Cluster list: 165.117.1.53 64620 20246 20246 209.116.242.118 (metric 450701) from 165.117.1.228 (165.117.2.30) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 110, valid, internal Community: 2548:999 3706:130 Originator: 165.117.2.30, Cluster list: 165.117.1.228 64620 20246 20246 216.1.71.34 (metric 340601) from 165.117.1.77 (165.117.1.77) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 110, valid, internal, best Community: 2548:999 3706:132 BGP routing table entry for 199.253.174.0/24, version 8526987 Paths: (3 available, best #3) Advertised to peer-groups: rr-pop decnap1 Advertised to non peer-group peers: 165.117.68.178 207.88.240.73 209.133.31.53 64620 20246 20246 209.116.242.118 (metric 350401) from 165.117.1.53 (165.117.2.30) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 110, valid, internal Community: 2548:999 3706:130 Originator: 165.117.2.30, Cluster list: 165.117.1.53 64620 20246 20246 209.116.242.118 (metric 350401) from 165.117.1.228 (165.117.2.30) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 110, valid, internal Community: 2548:999 3706:130 Originator: 165.117.2.30, Cluster list: 165.117.1.228 64620 20246 20246 216.1.71.34 (metric 240301) from 165.117.1.77 (165.117.1.77) Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 110, valid, internal, best Community: 2548:999 3706:132 --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
This may sound odd, coming from me who is a halfway alarmist, but: 1) how is this really a 'problem'? Don't get me wrong, announcing a reserved AS is as bad as announcing 10/8, but, what did it break? Is it enough of a problem to spam nanog about it? 2) Did you call/email/page/carrier-pidgeon Digex/ICI about this? On Sun, 12 Aug 2001, John Fraizer wrote:
08/07/01 Internet Routing Problems Reserved AS Numbers ------------------- AS64620 at Mae-West from Digex (AS2548) ASPATH=2548 64620 20246 20246 IGP
-- Alex Rubenstein, AR97, K2AHR, alex@nac.net, latency, Al Reuben -- -- Net Access Corporation, 800-NET-ME-36, http://www.nac.net --
On Sun, 12 Aug 2001, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
This may sound odd, coming from me who is a halfway alarmist, but:
1) how is this really a 'problem'? Don't get me wrong, announcing a reserved AS is as bad as announcing 10/8, but, what did it break? Is it enough of a problem to spam nanog about it?
2) Did you call/email/page/carrier-pidgeon Digex/ICI about this?
1) I don't consider my post SPAM or fluf or anything else other than operational content. A well known and respected carrier is announcing a reserved AS. It didn't break anything here but, the announcement wouldn't make it into anyones tables who was using 64620 in a confederation and as a result, it very well could be breaking something somewhere. Beyond that, it doesn't set a very good example for others. I guess I'll have to rethink my "lower AS = higher clue" theory. 2) It's not what it broke but, what's broken that is allowing it to happen to begin with. It's fairly apparent that someone neglected to add 64620 to a confederation statement. (And doesn't have anything in place to prevent leaking reserved AS's either.) 3) No. I did not contact Digex/ICI directly because: a) I'm not a direct customer. b) I'm not a direct peer. c) The leak has shown up in the IPMA (http://www.merit.edu/ipma/)listings for the past 4 days and it's obvious that they're not monitoring IPMA or don't care. --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
On Sun, Aug 12 2001 at 03:15:58%P -0400, John Fraizer wrote:
On Sun, 12 Aug 2001, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
This may sound odd, coming from me who is a halfway alarmist, but:
1) how is this really a 'problem'? Don't get me wrong, announcing a reserved AS is as bad as announcing 10/8, but, what did it break? Is it enough of a problem to spam nanog about it?
2) Did you call/email/page/carrier-pidgeon Digex/ICI about this?
1) I don't consider my post SPAM or fluf or anything else other than operational content. A well known and respected carrier is announcing a reserved AS. It didn't break anything here but, the announcement wouldn't make it into anyones tables who was using 64620 in a confederation and as a result, it very well could be breaking something somewhere. Beyond that, it doesn't set a very good example for others. I guess I'll have to rethink my "lower AS = higher clue" theory.
2) It's not what it broke but, what's broken that is allowing it to happen to begin with. It's fairly apparent that someone neglected to add 64620 to a confederation statement. (And doesn't have anything in place to prevent leaking reserved AS's either.)
This has nothing to do with confederations. This was a misconfigured peer that was a mistake anyone could have made. It was fixed and hopefully nobody was hurt to badly by this error.
3) No. I did not contact Digex/ICI directly because:
a) I'm not a direct customer. b) I'm not a direct peer. c) The leak has shown up in the IPMA (http://www.merit.edu/ipma/)listings for the past 4 days and it's obvious that they're not monitoring IPMA or don't care.
I assure you we do care and we do try to keep up on the merit pages but things can get hectic and things can get missed. I thank you for the heads-up post that did in-fact lead to the problem solved. I frown upon the technical speculation and the name bashing.
--- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
---- Christopher Johnston - cjohnston@intermedia.com Manager, Tier III & Network Operations Intermedia Business Internet 24-hour Support 888-297-1400
On Sun, 12 Aug 2001 01:31:16 EDT, John Fraizer <nanog@Overkill.EnterZone.Net> said:
Reserved AS Numbers ------------------- AS64620 at Mae-West from Digex (AS2548) ASPATH=2548 64620 20246 20246 IGP
I'll worry about this once we stamp out providers that number their router interfaces with RFC1918 space and thereby break PMTU discovery for people who do proper ingress/egress martian filtering... ;) On the other hand, we've had RFC1918 filtering wars recently - I don't recall flame-fests about martian AS numbers lately ;) Valdis Kletnieks Operating Systems Analyst Virginia Tech
On Sun, 12 Aug 2001 Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
I'll worry about this once we stamp out providers that number their router interfaces with RFC1918 space and thereby break PMTU discovery for people who do proper ingress/egress martian filtering... ;)
On the other hand, we've had RFC1918 filtering wars recently - I don't recall flame-fests about martian AS numbers lately ;)
You dont? wasnt it in April? and John was talking about the same thing. Personally, we dont see problems like this 'anymore'. We filter on any and all reserved ASpaths. We also filter on RFC1918. And since we filter it, we dont worry about it anymore. Personally, I applaud Verio for all the filtering they do (and anyone else that does it). This was also posted in April in regards to filtering peers (you can filter your transit providers). http://www.nielsen.net/people/christian/linx.html http://www.irbs.com/internet/nanog/0104/0161.html Christian
participants (5)
-
Alex Rubenstein -
Christian Nielsen -
Christopher Johnston -
John Fraizer -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu