Subject: [RPSEC] a new question about valid advertisements (originations)

From: Sandy Murphy <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 11:58:18 -0500 (EST)

We settled the question last week about being allocated a /8, suballocating
a /16 and continuing to announce the /8.  Everyone believes that this is
desirable and wants to have the security properties state that this is
valid and the security mechanisms continue to permit it.

Done.

But what about if the organization that is allocated the /8 and suballocated
the /16 announces the /16 also?  Such things happen when providers are
attempting to do load balancing and the like, right?  So I've been thinking
that if you were allocated a /8 you would be allowed to advertise any
more specific prefix as well.  But is the case where you are advertising
a more specific prefix that you've suballocated to another party against
the accepted behavior?

I can see the possibility that this would be considered a security problem,
as announcing the /16 you'd suballocated would effect the way traffic
flowed in the Internet, as some places would see and accept one /16 and
others would see and accept the other.

So help me out here - is the announcement of a more specific prefix of
a block you've been allocated and which you've suballocated to someone
else - permitted?  a problem?  something to prevent with the security
mechanisms?

--Sandy

_______________________________________________
RPSEC mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec