- routing-wg - mailman.ripe.net

European External Routing after July 1st
by Daniel Karrenberg 24 Jun '94

24 Jun '94

Dear colleagues, as most of you will know major changes will happen to the external routing topology between significant European ISPs. A major problem with this is the uncertainty about when exactly changes will happen and what their precise nature will be. Fortunately we now have a Routing Registry and tools to use it. Registering your routing policy in the registry immediately makes the information available to all other ISPs who can use it to diagnose problems. This can supplement or even eliminate mail messages about the changes which often do not reach all those affected. I strongly suggest that all service providers (YOU!) register any changes *as they are made*. Having a real time image on how things *should* work will certainly help others to keep instabilities at a minimum and make external routing work how it should. Tools like prpath and prtraceroute will show the new intended paths immediately and compare them to actual paths being used. Once you have a concrete plan for a major change, register it too as remarks in the aut-num object. While this cannot be used by the diagnostic tools it may be useful to humans who try to understand what is happening. Registering routing policies as they are changed will help to minimise instabilities caused by the reconfigurations and facilitate debugging of problems. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Regards Daniel Karrenberg RIPE NCC Manager

1 0

The Top 10
by Tony Bates 17 Jun '94

17 Jun '94

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri Jun 17 18:35:00 MET DST 1994 This is a list of the "Top 10" players who if CIDRizing at the AS level could make a significant gain in the size of Internet routing tables. This may be an over-estimation but it is hoped that this can act as an incentive for the "Top 10" and others to look at their CIDR capability. A full summary of all the ASes seen in the Internet can be seen by looking in: ftp.ripe.net:cidr/stats/AS* Other interesting stats can also be found there. As stated above this is auto-generated so it is not checked before it leaves my workstation. These stats will include more information on deltas in coming weeks. Here's follows the last weeks "Top 10" list with the corresponding date. --- 17Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 785 304 481 61.3% The JANET IP Service AS174 1231 858 373 30.3% NYSERNET-AS AS701 910 540 370 40.7% AlterNet AS372 1148 810 338 29.4% NSN-AMES-AS AS1270 435 217 218 50.1% EUnet/DE AS81 318 126 192 60.4% CONCERT AS19 671 519 152 22.7% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 542 401 141 26.0% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 235 104 131 55.7% BCNET-AS AS1849 336 209 127 37.8% PIPEX, Public IP EXchange --- 16Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 786 305 481 61.2% The JANET IP Service AS701 916 547 369 40.3% AlterNet AS174 1212 864 348 28.7% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1145 812 333 29.1% NSN-AMES-AS AS1270 435 217 218 50.1% EUnet/DE AS81 317 127 190 59.9% CONCERT AS19 669 520 149 22.3% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 543 402 141 26.0% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 235 104 131 55.7% BCNET-AS AS1849 332 207 125 37.7% PIPEX, Public IP EXchange --- 15Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 786 305 481 61.2% The JANET IP Service AS701 922 547 375 40.7% ALTERNET-AS AS174 1203 856 347 28.8% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1140 803 337 29.6% NSN-AMES-AS AS81 335 129 206 61.5% CONCERT AS1270 418 215 203 48.6% EUnet/DE AS19 667 516 151 22.6% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 546 402 144 26.4% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 233 103 130 55.8% BCNET-AS AS1849 331 206 125 37.8% PIPEX, Public IP EXchange --- 14Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 691 302 389 56.3% The JANET IP Service AS174 1206 856 350 29.0% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1128 794 334 29.6% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 842 515 327 38.8% ALTERNET-AS AS1270 435 217 218 50.1% EUnet/DE AS81 317 127 190 59.9% CONCERT AS19 659 515 144 21.9% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 541 400 141 26.1% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 233 103 130 55.8% BCNET-AS AS1849 331 206 125 37.8% PIPEX, Public IP EXchange --- 13Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 763 304 459 60.2% The JANET IP Service AS701 919 547 372 40.5% ALTERNET-AS AS174 1211 856 355 29.3% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1107 788 319 28.8% NSN-AMES-AS AS1270 435 217 218 50.1% EUnet/DE AS81 317 127 190 59.9% CONCERT AS19 659 513 146 22.2% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 540 400 140 25.9% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 233 103 130 55.8% BCNET-AS AS1849 327 205 122 37.3% PIPEX, Public IP EXchange --- 12Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 762 303 459 60.2% The JANET IP Service AS174 1216 854 362 29.8% NYSERNET-AS AS701 892 531 361 40.5% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1121 795 326 29.1% NSN-AMES-AS AS1270 435 217 218 50.1% EUnet/DE AS81 317 127 190 59.9% CONCERT AS19 661 513 148 22.4% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 543 402 141 26.0% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 233 103 130 55.8% BCNET-AS AS1849 331 206 125 37.8% PIPEX, Public IP EXchange --- 11Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 753 301 452 60.0% The JANET IP Service AS701 919 543 376 40.9% ALTERNET-AS AS174 1227 861 366 29.8% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1121 799 322 28.7% NSN-AMES-AS AS1270 432 215 217 50.2% EUnet/DE AS81 314 127 187 59.6% CONCERT AS19 649 503 146 22.5% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 537 399 138 25.7% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 234 104 130 55.6% BCNET-AS AS1849 330 207 123 37.3% PIPEX, Public IP EXchange --- 10Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 755 301 454 60.1% The JANET IP Service AS174 1240 864 376 30.3% NYSERNET-AS AS701 893 537 356 39.9% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1084 775 309 28.5% NSN-AMES-AS AS1270 440 220 220 50.0% EUnet/DE AS81 293 128 165 56.3% CONCERT AS19 657 510 147 22.4% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 539 401 138 25.6% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 236 104 132 55.9% BCNET-AS AS1849 325 204 121 37.2% PIPEX, Public IP EXchange

1 0

The Top 10
by Tony Bates 10 Jun '94

10 Jun '94

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri Jun 10 18:35:00 MET DST 1994 This is a list of the "Top 10" players who if CIDRizing at the AS level could make a significant gain in the size of Internet routing tables. This may be an over-estimation but it is hoped that this can act as an incentive for the "Top 10" and others to look at their CIDR capability. A full summary of all the ASes seen in the Internet can be seen by looking in: ftp.ripe.net:cidr/stats/AS* Other interesting stats can also be found there. As stated above this is auto-generated so it is not checked before it leaves my workstation. These stats will include more information on deltas in coming weeks. Here's follows the last weeks "Top 10" list with the corresponding date. --- 10Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 755 301 454 60.1% The JANET IP Service AS174 1240 864 376 30.3% NYSERNET-AS AS701 893 537 356 39.9% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1084 775 309 28.5% NSN-AMES-AS AS1270 440 220 220 50.0% EUnet/DE AS81 293 128 165 56.3% CONCERT AS19 657 510 147 22.4% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 539 401 138 25.6% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 236 104 132 55.9% BCNET-AS AS1849 325 204 121 37.2% PIPEX, Public IP EXchange --- 09Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 732 297 435 59.4% The JANET IP Service AS174 1206 860 346 28.7% NYSERNET-AS AS701 859 533 326 38.0% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1121 798 323 28.8% NSN-AMES-AS AS1270 430 214 216 50.2% EUnet/DE AS81 335 129 206 61.5% CONCERT AS19 659 511 148 22.5% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 553 414 139 25.1% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS AS1849 325 204 121 37.2% PIPEX, Public IP EXchange --- 08Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 715 294 421 58.9% The JANET IP Service AS174 1206 855 351 29.1% NYSERNET-AS AS701 852 529 323 37.9% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1100 798 302 27.5% NSN-AMES-AS AS1270 423 207 216 51.1% EUnet/DE AS81 335 129 206 61.5% CONCERT AS19 654 506 148 22.6% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 548 410 138 25.2% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS AS1290 245 129 116 47.3% EUNet GB --- 07Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 705 290 415 58.9% The JANET IP Service AS174 1191 838 353 29.6% NYSERNET-AS AS701 856 531 325 38.0% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1083 792 291 26.9% NSN-AMES-AS AS1717 781 529 252 32.3% RENATER AS1270 423 207 216 51.1% EUnet/DE AS81 312 126 186 59.6% CONCERT AS19 644 499 145 22.5% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 533 401 132 24.8% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS --- 06Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 705 290 415 58.9% The JANET IP Service AS174 1188 848 340 28.6% NYSERNET-AS AS701 858 533 325 37.9% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1062 786 276 26.0% NSN-AMES-AS AS1717 781 529 252 32.3% RENATER AS1270 423 207 216 51.1% EUnet/DE AS81 316 126 190 60.1% CONCERT AS19 625 484 141 22.6% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 533 401 132 24.8% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS --- 05Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 705 290 415 58.9% The JANET IP Service AS174 1193 850 343 28.8% NYSERNET-AS AS701 812 505 307 37.8% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1071 796 275 25.7% NSN-AMES-AS AS1717 780 528 252 32.3% RENATER AS1270 423 207 216 51.1% EUnet/DE AS81 333 129 204 61.3% CONCERT AS19 656 508 148 22.6% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 534 402 132 24.7% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS --- 04Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 703 293 410 58.3% The JANET IP Service AS174 1199 849 350 29.2% NYSERNET-AS AS701 842 528 314 37.3% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1095 803 292 26.7% NSN-AMES-AS AS1717 787 535 252 32.0% RENATER AS1270 422 206 216 51.2% EUnet/DE AS81 334 129 205 61.4% CONCERT AS19 637 494 143 22.4% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 552 413 139 25.2% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS --- 03Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 704 293 411 58.4% The JANET IP Service AS174 1187 834 353 29.7% NYSERNET-AS AS701 829 526 303 36.6% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 764 522 242 31.7% RENATER AS1270 422 206 216 51.2% EUnet/DE AS81 306 122 184 60.1% CONCERT AS372 890 706 184 20.7% NSN-AMES-AS AS19 649 502 147 22.7% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 549 410 139 25.3% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS

1 0

Minutes of the last WG, final version
by jimi＠dxcoms.cern.ch 07 Jun '94

07 Jun '94

Final Minutes of the last Routing-WG. Thanks to Daniel and Gilles for their comments. Anne, would you please incorporate this text in the draft Ripe minutes? Thanks, -- Jean-Michel RIPE Routing-WG Draft Minutes Amsterdam, Tuesday May 17th 6 hours Minutes: Jean-Michel Jouanigot, Gilles Farrache (scribe) 0. Previous minutes, agenda. The previous minutes and the agenda were approved. Gilles Farrache voluntered (?) as a scribe. 1. CIDR deployment status CIDR development is progressing well. All the organizations that participated in this effort should be thanked and the networks that did not yet convert to CIDR should do it as soon as possible. Tony Bates presented a few graphs on the evolution of the number of routes and paths in the Internet. The slides (and other useful data) are available from ftp.ripe.net:/cidr. Computations are made on an AS basis to estimate the routing table reduction if these ASes convert to CIDR. Everyone was encouraged to study these data. We can observe a quite significant decrease of the number of routes (20400 down to 18400) and paths (53000 down to 50000), but this is probably not going to last very long. Regular messages are sent by the Ripe NCC and list the first 10 Autonomous systems Internet wide that would really save a significant amount of routes if they convert to CIDR. If your AS is listed in there, you should definitely do something! With the recent development of CIDR in the Internet, the current model for policy based routing has to be reviewed, since aggregates are not taken into account. Two proposals have been made: one from Tony Bates, Marten Terpstra and Daniel Karrenberg (Ripe NCC) and another one from Laurent Joncheray and Elise Guerich (Merit). Both proposals were presented first (see below), and then a general discussion took place with the aim to come to a general proposal to be used by both the RIPE and Merit RRs. 2. Ripe-81 ++ and related documents Marten Terpstra presented a proposal for representing classless addresses in the database. For more details, please read the draft document 'ripe-clarep' available from ftp.ripe.net. Examples: classful address: 193.48.80.0 classful range : 193.48.80.0 - 193.48.85.0 prefix/length : 193.48.80.0/24 193.48.80.0/20 classless range : 191.1.1.0 > 192.1.1.255 does not need to be aligned on a bit boundary. Tony Bates then presented the enhanced version of Ripe-81 called Ripe-81++. This proposal introduces new concepts: - the allocation registry and the routing registry are now separate. The current 'inetnum' object is split into two new objects: a new 'route' object and the current inetnum object in which all routing and obsolete information have been removed. - In the route object, the aut-sys tag is replaced by an 'origin' tag which indicates the AS number which injects this route in the Internet. The route is obviously classless, with a prefix/length representation. - There is no major modification on the routing policy description except that AS-MACROS and COMMUNITIES can now be used, and an 'as-reject' tag has been added. Transition issues: - The database software should be modified (classless indexing), and the various tools should understand both the old and the new structure. - The new objects should be supported by the end of the summer, and all the routing information moved to the new 'route' object by the end of fall. Open issues: The PRIDE tools have to be modified, and the exchange of routing information with other routing databases should be possible. For more information, please read ripe-81++, available from ftp.ripe.net. 3. Extensions proposed by Merit. Laurent Joncheray presented the work currently being done at Merit. The RIPE database software was used and modified to support classless addresses, but: - It should be possible to distribute the database (by design) - New extensions are needed to implement all the policies. ALC is a new routing server developed by Merit. It makes the tools database syntax independant (ASCII protocol between client and server, the server computes the answers), and allows several ALC servers to exchange information. An ALC server is already running at Merit, and gets information from three databases (Ripe, Prdb and NSFnet db). It is proposed to run such a server at the Ripe NCC and connect the two servers; a natural extension would then be to add more ALC servers to the system. The current Ripe-81 syntax has been extended: - keywords have been added (from, accept, ...) to make the policy descriptions more readable - list of networks are allowed - proposes a solution to represent serveral connections between two ASes (using router addresses) - possibility to use a database selector - optional metric in as-out - static routing support - as-default extension (default route generation) - new 'as-exclude' tag - new 'as-transit' tag Some questions were raised concerning the distribution of the database and how some sort of security can be implemented. This point is for further study. 4. Discussions, conclusions A long discussion took place to compare the two proposals, and try to merge them. These minutes won't reflect each and every point discussed, but will just report on the conclusions reached. The Reader is asked to consult Ripe-81++ and Merit's proposal for details. Ripe-81++ will integrate the following extensions: A. Network lists are accepted wherever a community can be used with the following syntax: { 36.0.0.0/8, 191.1.0.0/16 } B. The 'default' tag will now allow an optional field explaining how the default route is derived. The Merit 'as-default' tag extension is accepted, but will be called 'default'. C. The need for a way to express 'local' policies when two ASes are connected thru several links is agreed. There's still no agreement on the final syntax, except that this information should not be in the 'as-in', 'as-out' tags, but in two new tags named 'interas-in' and 'interas-out', which are optional. These attributes will be additional to the as-in and as-out attributes which describe the overall policy of the AS while they describe local policy between the AS and (some of) its direct neighbours. If the 'interas-in' or 'interas-out' tags are present, then there should be a mechanism to generate the corresponding 'as-in' and 'as-out' tags (which only contain a subset of the information) to guarantee the integrity of the 'route' object. This should be done (on request, using a special keyword) by the software when registering the object. D. The Merit syntax introduces keywords like accept, from, ... It is agreed that this should be accepted when registering the objects, and that these keyworks should be present when a query is performed "in verbose mode". Queries in "non verbose mode" is still possible. All keywords are in lowercase and a list of allowed keywords will be provided (action on Elise Gerich). E. The Merit syntax also proposes a way to "compress" the information like: as-in: from AS690:1, AS701:2 accept AS237 This new syntax is not accepted because there was consensus that the additional functionality does not warrant the extra complexity in the descriptions. Many of those present expressed that they prefer a uniform description because it makes reading other people's policies easier. F. Network numbers representation: It is agreed that the prefix/length syntax is the only representation accepted. Network numbers should contain 3 dots: 35.0.0.0/8 G. The classless range notation for the 'inetnum' object is not to be discussed in this group but in the database group. The 'route' object only accepts what is agreed on point F. H. Optional as-out metric: this information has to be evaluated in the same way by the various neighbors, and is the only information of the 'route' object the owner of the object cannot really control. The proposal is rejected. I. Static route support: Everybody agreed on the principle: static routing should be represented in the database. A metric should be associated with a static route, and this metric should be relative to the 'as-in' metric. J. Ripe-81++ component tag in the route object: This tag is optional, and a better definition of the 'component' tag is needed, as well as a review of the definition of a 'HOLE'. In case of proxy-aggregate, Ripe-81++ should indicate that the listing of the components is mandatory. In case an aggregate is performed with as-set, and that all the networks aggregated are announced by the same AS, then this AS should appear as origin in the 'route' object. There's still a pending issue concerning the community list usage in the component tag: this needs to be better defined and how will this be guarded ? K. The key in the Ripe database used to be the network number. It will become 'route/origin'. Several route objects with the same 'route' fields but different 'origin' fields are accepted. L. Eventhough host routes could perfectly be represented in the new database, it is strongly discouraged (ripe-81++ page 56). M. Line splitting: the notation is accepted as-in: AS1234 100 ( AS-EBONE as-in: AS1234 100 AS1234 ) AND NOT AS2345 N. as-reject and as-exclude: It is decided to rename as-reject in ripe-81++ into as-exclude (proposed from Merit). The keyword 'exclude' will be a reserved keyword. O. 'as-transit' is included in Ripe-81++, but for experimental purposes. It was agreed that experimental additions should be moved a separate document which summarizes all experimental attributes and a pointer to this mechanism should be put into ripe-81++. The additions document should comprise all experimental additions being used a the time. P. The database selector (Merit's proposal) needs to be better specified. CONCLUSION: There is a general consensus on most of the extensions, and it is proposed to include all of these in the new version of the Ripe-81++ draft. This draft will be sent to the Ripe list for comments within two weeks, a final version being released in six weeks (June 28th). 3. Closing, AOB The action on Jean-Michel Jouanigot to coordinate the migration from ripe-60 to ripe-81 is almost complete. Only three 'bdry-gw' are still present in the Ripe database: DESY, ACONET and INFN. The action is to be changed into 3 separate actions on these sites: Action on Cristina Vistoli \ to convert from Action on Ewald Jenisch | ripe-60 to ripe-81 Action on Michael Ernst (or Hans Frese) / before July 1st. [ At the time of writing, ACONET bdry-gw seems to have been removed ] [EOF]

1 0

Re: Routing WG minutes (fwd)
by jimi＠dxcoms.cern.ch 06 Jun '94

06 Jun '94

Any other comments on the minutes? If not, I will integrate these and resend them to the list tomorrow. -- Jean-Michel >----- Text sent by Daniel Karrenberg follows -------

1 0

Routing WG minutes
by jimi＠dxcoms.cern.ch 06 Jun '94

06 Jun '94

Here are the draft minutes of the last Routing WG. Comments welcome, -- Jean-Michel ------------------------------------------------------------- RIPE Routing-WG Draft Minutes Amsterdam, Tuesday May 17th 6 hours Minutes: Jean-Michel Jouanigot, Gilles Farrache (scribe) 0. Previous minutes, agenda. The previous minutes and the agenda were approved. Gilles Farrache voluntered (?) as a scribe. 1. CIDR deployment status CIDR development is progressing well. All the organisations that participated in this effort should be thanked and the networks that did not yet convert to CIDR should do it as soon as possible. Tony Bates presented a few graphs on the evolution of the number of routes and paths in the Internet. The slides (and other useful data) are available from ftp.ripe.net:/cidr. Computations are made on an AS basis to estimate the routing table reduction if these ASes convert to CIDR. The reader is encouraged to study these data. We can observe a quite significant decrease of the number of routes (20400 down to 18400) and paths (53000 down to 50000), but this is probably not going to last very long. Regular messages are sent by the Ripe NCC and list the first 10 Autonomous systems that would really save a significant amount of routes if they convert to CIDR. If your AS is listed in there, you should definitely do something! With the recent development of CIDR in the Internet, the current model for policy based routing has to be reviewed, since aggregates are not taken into account. Two proposals have been made: one from Tony Bates, Marten Terpstra and Daniel Karrenberg (Ripe NCC) and another one from Laurent Joncheray and Elise Guerich (Merit). Both proposals were presented first (see below), and then a general discussion took place. 2. Ripe-81 ++ and related documents Marten Terpstra presented a proposal for representing classless addresses in the database. For more details, please read the draft document 'ripe-clarep' available from ftp.ripe.net. Examples: classful address: 193.48.80.0 classful range : 193.48.80.0 - 193.48.85.0 prefix/length : 193.48.80.0/24 193.48.80.0/20 classless range : 191.1.1.0 > 192.1.1.255 does not need to be aligned on a bit boundary. Tony Bates then presented the enhanced version of Ripe-81 called Ripe-81++. This proposal introduces new concepts: - the allocation registry and the routing registry are now separate. The current 'inetnum' object is split into two new objects: a new 'route' object and the current inetnum object in which all routing and obsolete information have been removed. - In the route object, the aut-sys tag is replaced by an 'origin' tag which indicates the AS number which injects this route in the Internet. The route is obviously classless, with a prefix/length representation. - There is no major modification on the routing policy description except that AS-MACROS and COMMUNITIES can now be used, and an 'as-reject' tag has been added. Transition issues: - The database software should be modified (classless indexing), and the various tools should understand both the old and the new structure. - The new objects should be supported by the end of the summer, and all the routing information moved to the new 'route' object by the end of fall. Open issues: The PRIDE tools have to be modified, and the exchange of routing information with other routing databases should be possible. For more information, please read ripe-81++, available from ftp.ripe.net. 3. Extensions proposed by Merit. Laurent Joncheray presented the work currently being done at Merit. The RIPE database software was used and modified to support classless addresses, but: - It should be possible to distribute the database (by design) - New extensions are needed to implement all the policies. ALC is a new routing server developed by Merit. It makes the tools database syntax independant (ASCII protocol between client and server, the server computes the answers), and allows several ALC servers to exchange information. An ALC server is already running at Merit, and gets information from three databases (Ripe, Prdb and NSFnet db). It is proposed to run such a server at the Ripe NCC and connect the two servers; a natural extension would then be to add more ALC servers to the system. The current Ripe-81 syntax has been extended: - keyworks have been added (from, accept, ...) - list of networks are allowed - proposes a solution to represent serveral connections between two ASes (using router addresses) - possibility to use a database selector - optional metric in as-out - static routing support - as-default extension (default route generation) - new 'as-exclude' tag - new 'as-transit' tag Some questions were raised concerning the distribution of the database and how some sort of security can be implemented. This point is for further study. 4. Discussions, conclusions A long discussion took place to compare the two proposals, and try to merge them. These minutes won't reflect each and every point discussed, but will just report on the conclusions reached. The Reader is asked to consult Ripe-81++ and Merit's proposal for details. Ripe-81++ will integrate the following extensions: A. Network lists are accepted wherever a community can be used with the following syntax: { 36.0.0.0/8, 191.1.0.0/16 } B. The 'default' tag will now allow an optional field explaining how the default route is generated. The Merit 'as-default' tag extension is accepted, but will be called 'default'. C. The need for a way to express 'local' policies when two ASes are connected thru several links is agreed. There's still no agreement on the final syntax, except that this information should not be in the 'as-in', 'as-out' tags, but in two new tags named 'interas-in' and 'interas-out', which are optional. If the 'interas-in' or 'interas-out' tags are present, then there should be a mechanism to generate the corresponding 'as-in' and 'as-out' tags (which only contain a subset of the information) to guarantee the integrity of the 'route' object. This should be done (on request, using a special keyword) by the software when registering the object. D. The Merit syntax introduces keywords like accept, from, ... It is agreed that this should be accepted when registering the objects, and that these keyworks should be present when a query is performed "in verbose mode". Queries in "non verbose mode" is still possible. All keywords are in lowercase and a list of allowed keyworks will be provided (action on Elise Gerich). E. The Merit syntax also proposes a way to "compress" the information like: as-in: from AS690:1, AS701:2 accept AS237 This new syntax is not accepted. F. Network numbers representation: It is agreed that the prefix/length syntax is the only representation accepted. Network numbers should contain 3 dots: 35.0.0.0/8 G. The classless range notation for the 'inetnum' object is not to be discussed in this group but in the database group. The 'route' object only accepts what is agreed on point F. H. Optional as-out metric: this information has to be evaluated in the same way by the various neighbors, and is the only information of the 'route' object the owner of the object cannot really control. The proposal is rejected. I. Static route support: Everybody agreed on the principle: static routing should be represented in the database. A metric should be associated with a static route, and this metric should be relative to the 'as-in' metric. J. Ripe-81++ component tag in the route object: This tag is optional, and a better definition of the 'componenet' tag is needed, as well as a review of the definition of a 'HOLE'. In case of proxy-aggregate, Ripe-81++ should indicate that the listing of the components is mandatory. In case an aggregate is performed with as-set, and that all the networks aggegated are announced by the same AS, then this AS should appear as origin in the 'route' object. There's still a pending issue concerning the community list usage in the component tag: this needs to be better defined and how will this be guarded ? K. The key in the Ripe database used to be the network number. It will become 'route/origin'. Several route objects with the same 'route' fields but different 'origin' fields are accepted. L. Eventhough host routes could perfectly be represented in the new database, it is strongly discouraged (ripe-81++ page 56). M. Line splitting: the notation is accepted as-in: AS1234 100 ( AS-EBONE as-in: AS1234 100 AS1234 ) AND NOT AS2345 N. as-reject and as-exclude: It is decided to rename as-reject in ripe-81++ into as-exclude (proposed from Merit). The keyword 'exclude' will be a reserved keyword. O. 'as-transit' is included in Ripe-81++, but for experimental purposes. P. The database selector (Merit's proposal) needs to be better specified. CONCLUSION: There is a general consensus on most of the extensions, and it is proposed to include all of these in the new version of the Ripe-81++ draft. This draft will be sent to the Ripe list for comments within two weeks, a final version being released in six weeks (June 28th). 3. Closing, AOB The action on Jean-Michel Jouanigot to coordinate the migration from ripe-60 to ripe-81 is almost complete. Only three 'bdry-gw' are still present in the Ripe database: DESY, ACONET and INFN. The action is to be changed into 3 separate actions on these sites: Action on Cristina Vistoli \ to convert from Action on Ewald Jenisch | ripe-60 to ripe-81 Action on Michael Ernst (or Hans Frese) / before July 1st. [ At the time of writing, ACONET bdry-gw seems to have been removed ] [end]

2 1

The Top 10
by Tony Bates 03 Jun '94

03 Jun '94

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri Jun 3 18:35:00 MET DST 1994 This is a list of the "Top 10" players who if CIDRizing at the AS level could make a significant gain in the size of Internet routing tables. This may be an over-estimation but it is hoped that this can act as an incentive for the "Top 10" and others to look at their CIDR capability. A full summary of all the ASes seen in the Internet can be seen by looking in: ftp.ripe.net:cidr/stats/AS* Other interesting stats can also be found there. As stated above this is auto-generated so it is not checked before it leaves my workstation. These stats will include more information on deltas in coming weeks. Here's follows the last weeks "Top 10" list with the corresponding date. --- 03Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 704 293 411 58.4% The JANET IP Service AS174 1187 834 353 29.7% NYSERNET-AS AS701 829 526 303 36.6% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 764 522 242 31.7% RENATER AS1270 422 206 216 51.2% EUnet/DE AS81 306 122 184 60.1% CONCERT AS372 890 706 184 20.7% NSN-AMES-AS AS19 649 502 147 22.7% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 549 410 139 25.3% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS --- 02Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 704 293 411 58.4% The JANET IP Service AS174 1198 842 356 29.7% NYSERNET-AS AS701 836 526 310 37.1% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1087 798 289 26.6% NSN-AMES-AS AS1717 770 525 245 31.8% RENATER AS1270 421 205 216 51.3% EUnet/DE AS81 306 121 185 60.5% CONCERT AS19 650 503 147 22.6% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 551 412 139 25.2% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS --- 01Jun94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 700 292 408 58.3% The JANET IP Service AS174 1173 838 335 28.6% NYSERNET-AS AS701 830 526 304 36.6% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1100 813 287 26.1% NSN-AMES-AS AS1717 767 528 239 31.2% RENATER AS1270 421 205 216 51.3% EUnet/DE AS81 303 123 180 59.4% CONCERT AS19 642 498 144 22.4% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 549 411 138 25.1% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS --- 31May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 699 292 407 58.2% The JANET IP Service AS174 1177 838 339 28.8% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1101 793 308 28.0% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 827 525 302 36.5% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 774 533 241 31.1% RENATER AS1270 421 205 216 51.3% EUnet/DE AS81 306 122 184 60.1% CONCERT AS19 635 496 139 21.9% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 549 411 138 25.1% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS --- 30May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 699 292 407 58.2% The JANET IP Service AS174 1184 848 336 28.4% NYSERNET-AS AS701 828 526 302 36.5% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1058 764 294 27.8% NSN-AMES-AS AS1717 786 540 246 31.3% RENATER AS1270 421 205 216 51.3% EUnet/DE AS81 305 121 184 60.3% CONCERT AS19 633 494 139 22.0% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 550 412 138 25.1% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS --- 29May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 700 292 408 58.3% The JANET IP Service AS174 1221 853 368 30.1% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1104 796 308 27.9% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 830 525 305 36.7% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 780 534 246 31.5% RENATER AS1270 421 205 216 51.3% EUnet/DE AS81 323 123 200 61.9% CONCERT AS19 647 505 142 21.9% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 550 412 138 25.1% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS --- 28May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS174 1273 862 411 32.3% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1078 788 290 26.9% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 799 524 275 34.4% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 780 533 247 31.7% RENATER AS1270 422 206 216 51.2% EUnet/DE AS81 303 121 182 60.1% CONCERT AS19 642 501 141 22.0% CSS-DOMAIN AS786 367 228 139 37.9% The JANET IP Service AS560 548 410 138 25.2% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS --- 27May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS174 1273 862 411 32.3% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1078 788 290 26.9% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 799 524 275 34.4% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 780 533 247 31.7% RENATER AS1270 422 206 216 51.2% EUnet/DE AS81 303 121 182 60.1% CONCERT AS19 642 501 141 22.0% CSS-DOMAIN AS786 367 228 139 37.9% The JANET IP Service AS560 548 410 138 25.2% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS

1 0

Trent going up again...
by Erik-Jan Bos 02 Jun '94

02 Jun '94

BGPD, Routing WG, using the historical data I have on the number of BGP entries in Amsterdam1.dante.net (starting 1 January 1994) the trent of the number of entries has been increasing, until a max value was hit of 20400. This was reached on Fri Apr 15 15:00:08 MET DST 1994. From this date on the trent of number of entries was downwards. Until 17683 (reached on Sun May 22 17:00:05 MET DST 1994) it was dropping. In the lastest graph I made, this afternoon, on the number of BGP entries in Amsterdam1.dante.net I see a slow, but steady, increase of entries since some time now. You might want to have a look at: gopher://gopher.nic.surfnet.nl:71/I9/surfnet/net-management/ip/nets.gif You can also retrieve either the gif or ps file from ftp.nic.surfnet.nl using anonymous FTP. The directory is surfnet/net-management/ip and the files are called: - nets.gif - nets.ps __ Erik-Jan.

1 0

The Top 10
by Tony Bates 27 May '94

27 May '94

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri May 27 18:35:01 MET DST 1994 This is a list of the "Top 10" players who if CIDRizing at the AS level could make a significant gain in the size of Internet routing tables. This may be an over-estimation but it is hoped that this can act as an incentive for the "Top 10" and others to look at their CIDR capability. A full summary of all the ASes seen in the Internet can be seen by looking in: ftp.ripe.net:cidr/stats/AS* Other interesting stats can also be found there. As stated above this is auto-generated so it is not checked before it leaves my workstation. These stats will include more information on deltas in coming weeks. Here's follows the last weeks "Top 10" list with the corresponding date. --- 27May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS174 1273 862 411 32.3% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1078 788 290 26.9% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 799 524 275 34.4% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 780 533 247 31.7% RENATER AS1270 422 206 216 51.2% EUnet/DE AS81 303 121 182 60.1% CONCERT AS19 642 501 141 22.0% CSS-DOMAIN AS786 367 228 139 37.9% The JANET IP Service AS560 548 410 138 25.2% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS --- 26May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS174 1256 858 398 31.7% NYSERNET-AS AS701 803 518 285 35.5% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1073 788 285 26.6% NSN-AMES-AS AS1717 784 539 245 31.2% RENATER AS1270 423 207 216 51.1% EUnet/DE AS81 304 122 182 59.9% CONCERT AS19 653 509 144 22.1% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 542 407 135 24.9% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 237 105 132 55.7% BCNET-AS AS1849 317 198 119 37.5% PIPEX, Public IP EXchange --- 25May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS174 1277 866 411 32.2% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1073 780 293 27.3% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 809 518 291 36.0% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 787 538 249 31.6% RENATER AS1270 423 208 215 50.8% EUnet/DE AS81 320 123 197 61.6% CONCERT AS1225 497 303 194 39.0% CICNET3-AS AS19 648 506 142 21.9% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 547 410 137 25.0% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 236 104 132 55.9% BCNET-AS --- 24May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS174 1246 856 390 31.3% NYSERNET-AS AS701 796 514 282 35.4% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1003 729 274 27.3% NSN-AMES-AS AS1717 785 535 250 31.8% RENATER AS1270 423 208 215 50.8% EUnet/DE AS1225 497 303 194 39.0% CICNET3-AS AS81 302 121 181 59.9% CONCERT AS19 650 508 142 21.8% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 544 409 135 24.8% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 236 104 132 55.9% BCNET-AS --- 23May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS174 1172 832 340 29.0% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1062 775 287 27.0% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 791 514 277 35.0% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 789 536 253 32.1% RENATER AS1270 423 208 215 50.8% EUnet/DE AS1225 494 300 194 39.3% CICNET3-AS AS81 301 121 180 59.8% CONCERT AS19 634 496 138 21.8% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 544 408 136 25.0% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 236 104 132 55.9% BCNET-AS --- 22May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS174 1186 840 346 29.2% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1107 811 296 26.7% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 791 509 282 35.7% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 790 537 253 32.0% RENATER AS1270 423 208 215 50.8% EUnet/DE AS81 319 123 196 61.4% CONCERT AS1225 494 300 194 39.3% CICNET3-AS AS560 543 407 136 25.0% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS19 634 498 136 21.5% CSS-DOMAIN AS271 236 104 132 55.9% BCNET-AS --- 21May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS174 1243 856 387 31.1% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1070 777 293 27.4% NSN-AMES-AS AS786 564 275 289 51.2% The JANET IP Service AS701 798 516 282 35.3% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 791 538 253 32.0% RENATER AS1270 415 206 209 50.4% EUnet/DE AS1225 495 301 194 39.2% CICNET3-AS AS81 301 121 180 59.8% CONCERT AS19 649 504 145 22.3% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 544 408 136 25.0% NEARNET-EXT-AS --- 20May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 698 292 406 58.2% The JANET IP Service AS174 1244 863 381 30.6% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1079 784 295 27.3% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 796 514 282 35.4% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 786 533 253 32.2% RENATER AS1270 420 205 215 51.2% EUnet/DE AS1225 497 303 194 39.0% CICNET3-AS AS81 279 118 161 57.7% CONCERT AS19 650 507 143 22.0% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 544 408 136 25.0% NEARNET-EXT-AS

1 1

The Top 10
by Tony Bates 20 May '94

20 May '94

This is an auto-generated mail on Fri May 20 18:35:00 MET DST 1994 This is a list of the "Top 10" players who if CIDRizing at the AS level could make a significant gain in the size of Internet routing tables. This may be an over-estimation but it is hoped that this can act as an incentive for the "Top 10" and others to look at their CIDR capability. A full summary of all the ASes seen in the Internet can be seen by looking in: ftp.ripe.net:cidr/stats/AS* Other interesting stats can also be found there. As stated above this is auto-generated so it is not checked before it leaves my workstation. These stats will include more information on deltas in coming weeks. Here's follows the last weeks "Top 10" list with the corresponding date. --- 20May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 698 292 406 58.2% The JANET IP Service AS174 1244 863 381 30.6% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1079 784 295 27.3% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 796 514 282 35.4% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 786 533 253 32.2% RENATER AS1270 420 205 215 51.2% EUnet/DE AS1225 497 303 194 39.0% CICNET3-AS AS81 279 118 161 57.7% CONCERT AS19 650 507 143 22.0% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 544 408 136 25.0% NEARNET-EXT-AS --- 19May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 694 290 404 58.2% The JANET IP Service AS174 1249 853 396 31.7% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1062 774 288 27.1% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 785 506 279 35.5% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 789 535 254 32.2% RENATER AS1270 421 205 216 51.3% EUnet/DE AS1225 496 302 194 39.1% CICNET3-AS AS81 257 106 151 58.8% CONCERT AS19 645 503 142 22.0% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 542 406 136 25.1% NEARNET-EXT-AS --- 18May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 693 289 404 58.3% The JANET IP Service AS174 1230 857 373 30.3% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1042 756 286 27.4% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 788 512 276 35.0% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 790 534 256 32.4% RENATER AS1270 421 205 216 51.3% EUnet/DE AS267 546 354 192 35.2% CICNET2-AS AS81 275 117 158 57.5% CONCERT AS19 625 484 141 22.6% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 543 407 136 25.0% NEARNET-EXT-AS --- 17May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 691 287 404 58.5% The JANET IP Service AS174 1236 852 384 31.1% NYSERNET-AS AS701 784 511 273 34.8% ALTERNET-AS AS372 1029 761 268 26.0% NSN-AMES-AS AS1717 785 532 253 32.2% RENATER AS1270 425 208 217 51.1% EUnet/DE AS1225 495 301 194 39.2% CICNET3-AS AS81 276 115 161 58.3% CONCERT AS19 651 506 145 22.3% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 538 405 133 24.7% NEARNET-EXT-AS --- 16May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 691 288 403 58.3% The JANET IP Service AS174 1163 833 330 28.4% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1017 739 278 27.3% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 780 509 271 34.7% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 783 529 254 32.4% RENATER AS1270 425 208 217 51.1% EUnet/DE AS1225 495 301 194 39.2% CICNET3-AS AS19 632 491 141 22.3% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 540 404 136 25.2% NEARNET-EXT-AS AS271 236 104 132 55.9% BCNET-AS --- 15May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 691 288 403 58.3% The JANET IP Service AS174 1175 836 339 28.9% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1003 735 268 26.7% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 765 509 256 33.5% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 783 529 254 32.4% RENATER AS1270 425 208 217 51.1% EUnet/DE AS1225 494 300 194 39.3% CICNET3-AS AS81 292 115 177 60.6% CONCERT AS19 639 492 147 23.0% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 540 404 136 25.2% NEARNET-EXT-AS --- 14May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 694 290 404 58.2% The JANET IP Service AS174 1236 862 374 30.3% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1036 762 274 26.4% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 781 512 269 34.4% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 784 529 255 32.5% RENATER AS1270 425 208 217 51.1% EUnet/DE AS1225 490 300 190 38.8% CICNET3-AS AS81 277 116 161 58.1% CONCERT AS19 650 506 144 22.2% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 541 405 136 25.1% NEARNET-EXT-AS --- 13May94 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsCIDR NetGain % Gain Description AS786 695 290 405 58.3% The JANET IP Service AS174 1224 844 380 31.0% NYSERNET-AS AS372 1038 759 279 26.9% NSN-AMES-AS AS701 762 504 258 33.9% ALTERNET-AS AS1717 765 522 243 31.8% RENATER AS1270 425 208 217 51.1% EUnet/DE AS1225 489 300 189 38.7% CICNET3-AS AS81 278 117 161 57.9% CONCERT AS19 650 503 147 22.6% CSS-DOMAIN AS560 541 405 136 25.1% NEARNET-EXT-AS

1 0