BOF: Internet Routing Registry

Thursday 5 September, Kitakyushu International Conference Centre, Kitakyushu, Japan

Minutes

Meeting commenced: 6:00 pm

Chair: George Michaelson

The Chair introduced the SIG and explained the agenda. He provided general guidelines for the presenters and encouraged a wide range of participation in the discussions.

Contents

1. JPIRR project update
2. Route flap damping: harmful?

1. JPIRR project update

Kuniaki Kondo, JPIRR

This presentation provided an update of JPIRR project, outlining the history and current status of the project. It was noted that it is currently operated by three people, although just one of those is responsible for most of the operations. It was explained that the project is in need of more participants and routing objects. It was also noted that it has been experiencing some mirroring problem with APIRR.

More information on the project is available from http://jpirr.nic.ad.jp.

Questions and discussion

• There was an offer from Andy Linton to help debug the mirroring problem with APIRR.

Action items

• None

Top

2. Route flap damping: harmful?

[Presentations]

Randy Bush, IIJ

This presentation summarised the results of a study by a student (Zhuoqing Morley Mao from UC Berkeley) about the harmful effects of flap damping. The presenter summarised how the tests were performed. He noted that test routes which had been announced once, withdrawn once, and unavailable in the space of an hour were, when re-announced, already filtered by route flap damping. He noted that there were delays in messages due to variations in timer values, propagation delays, and processing overheads.

The study suggests that route flap damping parameter settings are too aggressive and need to be redesigned with a greater understanding of the impact of router overhead and related issues.

Questions and discussion

• It was noted that this is a very interesting study and that future updates would be appreciated. The presenter invited others to become participants in the study.

Additional general discussion

• There was a discussion about the suggestion to remove export and import fields from the aut-num object and create a new object for IRR aut-num. It was noted that although this information was required when requesting an ASN, it was not mandatory to register it. Furthermore, creating a new object, and differentiating between registry aut-num and IRR aut-num, is a difficult task.
• It was suggested to discuss this further on the RPSL mailing list.
• It was agreed that the Chair would report to the AMM the recommendation that import and export information during the application process should not be put in the whois database, but that members will be encouraged to publish their routing policy.

Action items

• Action irr-14-001: Chair to report to the AMM the recommendation that import and export information during the application process should not be put in the whois database, but that members will be encouraged to publish their routing policy.

Meeting closed: 18:40

Minuted by: Sanjaya

Open action items

• Action irr-14-001: Chair to report to the AMM the recommendation that import and export information during the application process should not be put in the whois database, but that members will be encouraged to publish their routing policy.

Top  |  SIGs

Hosted by: