Hello Liu, I have some clarifying questions, see below.
On 13 May 2025, at 17:48, liu haoran <qq593277393@outlook.com> wrote:
As the administrator of AKIX , we have observed a recurring issue where newly joined members frequently submit AS-SET objects without populating the mandatory members attribute in IRR databases. From both operational and RPSL (Routing Policy Specification Language) specification perspectives, an AS-SET containing no members represents an invalid configuration, as it fundamentally defeats its purpose of aggregating Autonomous Systems (AS) for routing policy management.
I confirmed that an as-set can be created in the RIPE database without any members: attribute. Approximately 2,000 of nearly 27,000 total as-sets do not have any members: attribute. If a members: attribute is supplied, the ASN or AS-SET value does not need to exist. Should we also validate either the ASN or AS-SET value?
We formally propose that IRR database maintainers implement mandatory validation during AS-SET creation to enforce: 1. Require at minimum one valid AS number in the members field
Since only hierarchical AS-SET objects can now be created in the RIPE database, if a parent AS-SET contains a "members:" attribute, can that allow the child to have no (additional) members?
2. Reject AS-SET submissions containing empty/null members attributes
This is already the case (if a members: attribute is specified, it cannot be empty or null).
3. Provide clear error messaging specifying the validation requirements This technical enforcement would align with RFC 2725 (Routing Policy System Security) recommendations while significantly improving routing registry data quality and operational reliability for Internet Exchange ecosystems.
RFC 2622 defines the as-set "members:" attribute to be type "optional, multi-valued", does RFC 2725 supercede this? https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2622#section-5.1 Regards, Ed Shryane RIPE NCC