Re: [apops] 1/8

  • To: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>
  • Subject: Re: [apops] 1/8
  • From: Seiichi Kawamura <kawamucho at mesh dot ad dot jp>
  • Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 09:37:20 +0900
  • Cc: apops at apops dot net
  • Delivered-to: apops at mailman dot apnic dot net
  • In-reply-to: <m2r5piqy46.wl%randy at psg dot com>
  • List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/apops>
  • List-help: <mailto:apops-request@apops.net?subject=help>
  • List-id: Asia Pacific Operators Forum <apops.apops.net>
  • List-post: <mailto:apops@apops.net>
  • List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apops>, <mailto:apops-request@apops.net?subject=subscribe>
  • List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apops>, <mailto:apops-request@apops.net?subject=unsubscribe>
  • References: <4B593ED6.8020508@mesh.ad.jp> <m2r5piqy46.wl%randy@psg.com>
  • User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
    • Hash: SHA1
      
      Hi Randy
      
      thanks for your comments.
      fully agree to them, and I also have
      another reason to be concerned.
      
      there is a higher chance of being hijacked
      with 1/8 then with others because of the
      naughty usage of the /8 in the past.
      I seriously doubt these people that misbehave
      check allocation status.
      There's more but I won't go on.
      For now, I cannot think of a good way to
      go about this. If we had RPKI now,
      this would be one less worry...
      
      I think they are doing testing right now, but
      it would feel a bit more comfortable if APNIC handed out
      1/8 after they've done with 27/8.
      
      Any others that have suggestions?
      
      Regards,
      Seiichi
      
      
      Randy Bush wrote:
      >> 1/8 was allocated to APNIC this month, but as an LIR in the AP region
      >> (I'm a JPNIC member), I have some concerns regarding this.
      >>
      >> 1/8 has had many bogons in the past due to people copying example
      >> configs and putting them into the router, people using 1/8 as private
      >> space, etc.  As an ISP that may request additional allocations, this
      >> is a concern for me.  Ofcourse no /8 is ever clean, but 1/8 is at a
      >> point where it feels slightly uncomfortable to have the prefix.
      >>
      >> Do others share my concern?
      > 
      > this will be of concern for at least two reasons
      > 
      >   o people who have bogon filters in their routers and do not update
      >     them.  the measurements olaf maennel and i did a few years back show
      >     that, even when we all shout on the ops' mailing lists, people do
      >     not change filters.  many isps and end sites do not know they
      >     filter, and the filters were installed by someone who left the
      >     company before years ago.
      > 
      >     we also did a toolset which aided in diagnosing where in the network
      >     topology such filters were, to the AS and router level.  this tool
      >     has never been used or deployed by the rirs which are handing out
      >     the filtered space.
      > 
      >   o as has been discussed on nanog and elsewhere, many foolish sites
      >     have used 1/8 as if it was rfc1918 private address space.  this
      >     means they will need to renumber to be able to reach LIRs and end
      >     sites which get legitimate allocations out of the now allocated 1/8.
      >     they did something stupid, so they do not have my sympathy.  i think
      >     we should put some really good content in the 1/8 space and let them
      >     whine to their upstream isp's noc.
      > 
      > randy
      > 
      -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
      Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
      
      iEYEARECAAYFAktc58AACgkQcrhTYfxyMkL24QCeJeelcGkhLsYAfs2df9jJwG3l
      WHMAniRazYwBIvtdWTclMZZSQ59ewqf+
      =tVhX
      -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----