On 1/Jul/15 16:54, Nick Hilliard wrote: > you probably want to ignore more rpsl constructs and depend solely on > as-sets, aut-nums and route/route6 objects. RPSL is not going to live up > to your expectations.
Honestly, I'm ambivalent about using the IRR data for prefix-list generation (even without RPSL), also because of how much junk there is in there, and also how redundant some of it really is, e.g., someone creating a /32 (IPv4) route object and yet we only accept up to a /24 (IPv4) on the actual eBGP session, e.t.c. What I'm more focused is how we can continue to scale our current system, which is much more strict, focuses on deploying customer aggregates + le 24 & le 128, instead of enumerating all possible de-aggregates that have been registered in the IRR (helps keep the configuration file small and manageable, without sacrificing reachability). And then see how we can add RPKI into the mix to make things even simpler, if at all. Mark.