Sriram,
> On Oct 23, 2019, at 11:45 AM, Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) > <kotikalapudi.sriram=40nist....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > Out of the 477 routes with AS_SETs: > *** Identifying Routes with AS_SET that seem meaningless or malformed > *** > # Routes with only one AS in AS_SET : 383 > # Routes with Reserved ASN in AS_SET : 131 > # Routes with common AS in the AS_SEQUENCE and AS_SET : 139 The three of these have a strong feeling of bugs related to aggregation interacting with either confederations or private internal AS numbers and remote-private. Operators with diverse labs may wish to play around and see what they can generate. :-) (I don't claim our implementation is bug-free here. But I know what I'd look for if doing a code audit.) > # Routes with repeated ASes in the AS_SET : 0 This one is somewhat expected. The practice of canonicalizing sets in most people's code base should generally ensure that if you have a single sane BGP implementation in the path of the route to the observatory that the duplicates would be pruned. -- Jeff _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list GROW@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
