Re: [apnic-talk] Private ASN Route Objects
In message <YP5ZnNEIU3bKTzMa@tomh-laptop>,
Tom Harrison <tomh@apnic.net> wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 08:52:05PM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>> I have been in communication with APNIC staff members about these
>> specific bogon routes fairly continuously for over three weeks now,
>> but the only thing I am being told is that these routes are being
>> "discussed internally".
>
>Part of the issue here is that our system supports this purposefully
>at the moment, due to wanting the route management system to align
>where possible across both RPKI and Whois. We aren't yet sure how to
>deal with this problem, though. One option is to...
You are talking about how to deal with this *general* problem over the
LONG TERM. Although I am pleased to see APNIC taking such an interest
in solving the "whole" problem over the long term, this is clearly of
much greater interest to you APNIC staff folks than it is to me. I am
concerned with the short term fate of the specific bogon route objects
that I have been telling you folks about for a good four weeks now, and
from where I am sitting, there appears to have been little or no action
on those specific problematic route objects in four weeks.
I hope that you can understand why such an outcome is rather entirely
less than satisfying.
>Regarding the specific route objects you have raised with APNIC with
>bogon ASNs, we are working through this list with the account holders,
>to avoid any unintended consequences from removal (per e.g.
>https://www.mail-archive.com/db-wg@ripe.net/msg02844.html). Some of
>those objects have since been removed, while others are still pending.
>We will let you know once the status of each has been resolved.
"Working through the list"?? You make it sound as if I had burdened you
with some vast mountain of bogon route objects that you needed to look at.
But that last time I looked there were only about 10 or so of these
left in your data base, and I'm not sure what is soooooooo complex about
these bogus things that you folks might have been unable to verify that
these are all bogon route objects... AND mostly totally unusued ones...
even before lunch time on the first day that I reported them to you, let
alone by 4+ weeks later.
Nine out of ten of the IP blocks mentioned in those bogon route objects
are currently either unrouted or else are nowadays being routed by some
different ASNs. This can quickly and easily be verified via judicious
use of either RIPEStat or bgp.he.net. So all of those nine remaining
bogon route objects cane be deleted with no effect whatever on any ongoing
operations of anybody. The one case in which a remaining bogon route
object, presently in the APNIC data base, *is* actively being used is a
case in which the solution is both simple and obvious: The one goofball
who is improperly announcing that one (bogon) route needs to be told to
bugger off and start playing by the rules (and paying annual dues to APNIC)
just like everybody else has to do.
Again, I'm not sure that I see why this simple stuff should take 4+ weeks
to accomplish. As we say here "This isn't rocket science."
Bogon routes are bogon routes. Every one of them implies the invalid (and
possibly illicit) use of globally unassigned number resources. None of
them should be in the APNIC data base. Please remove them. Thank you.
Regards,
rfg