hierarchical route objects, part 1
- Date: Wed, 8 Jan 97 20:11:14 +0100
Dear colleagues,
regarding hierarchical authorization of route objects in the RIPE database:
from what I have heard there is a general feeling that it is needed and the
basic scheme to implement it should follow the lines:
* The root of the authorization tree is an AS-object (aut-num object). If
it contains a "mnt-lower" attribute it controls all route-objects which
have this AS as origin.
* Then for route-objects the same rules apply as for inetnum-objects with
respect to IP subranges: If a route-object contains a "mnt-lower" attri-
bute it controls all more specific route-objects immediately below.
* The authorization is checked against
- more or less specific route-objects, or existence of the route-object
itself with same origin (differing origin rejected)
- if no route-objects exist: which authorization is specified for the
autnum-object referred to by the origin attribute (rejected if this
authorisation is not met)
- if not even an autnum-object exists no action is taken
However: there is still a problem that route-objects are somehow logically
linked to allocated address space. The question how to deal with this is
still open - I continue on this in a separate mail.
Yet, the three rules for route-objects described above are a kind of common
denominator(*) and moreover a very reasonable approach (these rules are also
independent of the address space allocation relation to route-objects).
If there are no further denials I suggest to implement it that way.
Regards
Joachim
(*) Yes, I know: When aiming for the common denominator, be prepared for the
occasional division by zero.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Joachim Schmitz schmitz@localhost
DFN Network Operation Center
Rechenzentrum der Universitaet Stuttgart ++ 711 685 5553 voice
Allmandring 30 ++ 711 678 8363 FAX
D-70550 Stuttgart FRG (Germany)
_____________________________________________________________________________
|