The position of the DBTF is it's asking the routing working group for its opinion on the future of RPSL in the RIPE database. It is clear that there are data quality issues in some areas, but also that there is a good deal of data in the IRRDB which is operationally valuable. It would also be great to hear from other RIR IRRs about their position on this, but this is possibly a separate issue. Similarly for any engagement with the IETF. Nick
ripedenis--- via routing-wg <mailto:routing-wg@ripe.net> 14 May 2020 at 15:29 This is exactly the point I am making George. I am not saying the RIPE Database is special. Exactly the opposite. So if there is a problem with using RPSL in the RIPE Database I assume it is likely all IRRs have the same problem. So should the IETF look at this issue or is it reasonable to change the way routing data is processed or handled only in the RIPE IRR?
cheers denis
co-chair DB-WG
On Thursday, 14 May 2020, 16:16:13 CEST, George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org> wrote:
The RIPE DB's RPSL is not special in any regard Denis. Its one BGP configuration space after all.
If the observations about the RIPE IRR are true, then is it not equally likely they hold at other IRR too?
So I think a reasonable approach here might be to take observations about object types, complexity, usage, and ask other IRR if they also see these behaviours?
-George
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:00 AM ripedenis--- via routing-wg <routing-wg@ripe.net <mailto:routing-wg@ripe.net>> wrote:
Hi Gert
You are right, this has been an issue for many years. It is not only
the problem of parsing RPSL but also an issue with people understanding it as a language and applying it correctly. But should this be an issue taken up by the IETF? Or do you think the RIPE Database could/should do something different to all other IRRs?
cheers denis
co-chair DB-WG
On Thursday, 14 May 2020, 14:45:11 CEST, Gert Doering
<gert@space.net <mailto:gert@space.net>> wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 09:52:06AM +0000, ripedenis--- via
Just a comment on the RPSL issue from the RIPE 80 session today. RPSL has little to do with the accuracy of data in the RIPE IRR. RPSL is just a language. Assuming you understand the language, it is your choice whether or not you maintain your data and keep it accurate and up to date.
Right.
That said, the data quality regarding import: and output: lines in the RIPE DB is so poor that "bad and useless" is not halfway sufficient to describe its badness.
I think import/export is beyond repair - it is too complex to correctly parse, and at the same time not expressive enough to describe policy precisely enough ("export to AS X as peer, no further upstreaming
routing-wg wrote: permitted"
vs. "export to AS Y as upstream, further distribution expected").
Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 George Michaelson <mailto:ggm@algebras.org> 14 May 2020 at 15:15 The RIPE DB's RPSL is not special in any regard Denis. Its one BGP configuration space after all.
If the observations about the RIPE IRR are true, then is it not equally likely they hold at other IRR too?
So I think a reasonable approach here might be to take observations about object types, complexity, usage, and ask other IRR if they also see these behaviours?
-George
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:00 AM ripedenis--- via routing-wg
ripedenis--- via routing-wg <mailto:routing-wg@ripe.net> 14 May 2020 at 15:00 Hi Gert
You are right, this has been an issue for many years. It is not only the problem of parsing RPSL but also an issue with people understanding it as a language and applying it correctly. But should this be an issue taken up by the IETF? Or do you think the RIPE Database could/should do something different to all other IRRs?
cheers denis
co-chair DB-WG
On Thursday, 14 May 2020, 14:45:11 CEST, Gert Doering <gert@space.net> wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 09:52:06AM +0000, ripedenis--- via routing-wg wrote:
Just a comment on the RPSL issue from the RIPE 80 session today. RPSL has little to do with the accuracy of data in the RIPE IRR. RPSL is just a language. Assuming you understand the language, it is your choice whether or not you maintain your data and keep it accurate and up to date.
Right.
That said, the data quality regarding import: and output: lines in the RIPE DB is so poor that "bad and useless" is not halfway sufficient to describe its badness.
I think import/export is beyond repair - it is too complex to correctly parse, and at the same time not expressive enough to describe policy precisely enough ("export to AS X as peer, no further upstreaming permitted" vs. "export to AS Y as upstream, further distribution expected").
Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 Gert Doering <mailto:gert@space.net> 14 May 2020 at 13:45 Hi,
Right.
That said, the data quality regarding import: and output: lines in the RIPE DB is so poor that "bad and useless" is not halfway sufficient to describe its badness.
I think import/export is beyond repair - it is too complex to correctly parse, and at the same time not expressive enough to describe policy precisely enough ("export to AS X as peer, no further upstreaming permitted" vs. "export to AS Y as upstream, further distribution expected").
Gert Doering -- NetMaster ripedenis--- via routing-wg <mailto:routing-wg@ripe.net> 14 May 2020 at 10:52 Colleagues
Just a comment on the RPSL issue from the RIPE 80 session today. RPSL has little to do with the accuracy of data in the RIPE IRR. RPSL is just a language. Assuming you understand the language, it is your choice whether or not you maintain your data and keep it accurate and up to date.
If we were to change from RPSL to something else the data would not necessarily be of any better quality. But it would be 'non standard' compared to all the other IRRs. Changing RPSL, as a means of inputting and outputting routing data, is not something that can be considered unilaterally within the RIPE Database.
Perhaps a different question to ask could be, "is all the routing information contained in the RIPE Database still meaningful, useful and necessary (regardless of the language)?".
cheers denis
co-chair DB-WG