Should ris IGNORE default routes?
Andrzej Adam Filip anfi at poczta.onet.pl
Mon Aug 15 10:57:36 CEST 2005
Randy Bush wrote: >>I would like to create "simple" tool for IP->AS mapping based on riswhois >>data. > > i do not believe whois data have anything about as numbers > >>Would you suggest some "safe to ignore" margin for number of rispeers? > > so, you're looking at routing data (!=whois). the problem is that > some of the ris peers > o send all routes they know: internal, customer, peers, upstreams > o send all internal and customer > o send all customer > o ... > > so you're in for a complex and fun game on the path you're suggesting The problems with WHOIS is that *some* WHOIS servers provide incomplete, obsolete or missleading IPWHOIS info e.g. by happilly accepting untrue information. RISWWHOIS provides data that can not be safely "simplified" in *EVERY* case but it is possible for (great?) majority of internet address space. By example for 126.96.36.199 riswhois routes: 0.0.0.0/0 AS9009 1 188.8.131.52/17 AS16422 57 184.108.40.206/18 AS16422 57 220.127.116.11/24 AS16422 56 The best visible route from uninterrupted series of the most specific routes with AS16422 is reported by 57 rispeers. All routes with less specific prefixes are reported by lower number of rispeers. Thank in advance for *REAL* examples in which the above rule produces missleading results. -- Andrzej [en:Andrew] Adam Filip anfi at priv.onet.pl anfi at xl.wp.pl All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing -- Edmund Burke (1729-1797)