On May 4, 2011, at 8:48 PM, Martin Millnert wrote:
... Network C and D are transit customers of tier-1 network E. ... Network D announces prefix 1 to E.
Transit provider E, being a very large company, has after some government pressure decided to enable strict RPKI filtering ... Only a single network, E, implemented strict filtering of RPKI, yet A, not being a customer of E, lost access to 1, and all involved hardware is still functional.
Prefix 1 is for customer D (of network E); ergo, A lost access to D because D's choice of service provider. D voluntarily choose its service provider, and can always choose another. There is no party that was impacted without a choice; D choose A because of their much discussed "route assurance" technology, and that turned out (in your example) to be a bad choice. Another example might have it be a wise choice, but there's still no one impacted who didn't get any choice. How is this different than network D deciding to build a network with with an innovative routing technology, which may serve to distinguish it in a positive (or negative) manner based on actual performance? Back to my original question: "I understand how it would impact the network which has decided to make use of strict RPKI-based route validation (and therefore the network's customers by extension), but can you explain how it would otherwise effect that network's peers?" Thanks, /John