Re: [Sidrops] [GROW] Deprecation of AS_SET and AS_CONFED_SET -- feedback requested

Sriram,


> On Oct 23, 2019, at 11:45 AM, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) <[email protected]> wrote:
> Out of the 477 routes with AS_SETs:
> 	*** Identifying Routes with AS_SET that seem meaningless or malformed ***
> 	# Routes with only one AS in AS_SET : 383
> 	# Routes with Reserved ASN in AS_SET : 131
> 	# Routes with common AS in the AS_SEQUENCE and AS_SET : 139

The three of these have a strong feeling of bugs related to aggregation interacting with either confederations or private internal AS numbers and remote-private.

Operators with diverse labs may wish to play around and see what they can generate. :-)
(I don't claim our implementation is bug-free here.  But I know what I'd look for if doing a code audit.)



> 	# Routes with repeated ASes in the AS_SET : 0

This one is somewhat expected.  The practice of canonicalizing sets in most people's code base should generally ensure that if you have a single sane BGP implementation in the path of the route to the observatory that the duplicates would be pruned.

-- Jeff

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr