%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-idr-route-leak-detection-mitigation instead of this I-D. @techreport{sriram-idr-route-leak-detection-mitigation-01, number = {draft-sriram-idr-route-leak-detection-mitigation-01}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sriram-idr-route-leak-detection-mitigation/01/}, author = {Kotikalapudi Sriram and Doug Montgomery and Brian Dickson}, title = {{Methods for Detection and Mitigation of BGP Route Leaks}}, pagetotal = 17, year = 2015, month = jul, day = 5, abstract = {In {[}I-D.ietf-grow-route-leak-problem-definition{]}, the authors have provided a definition of the route leak problem, and also enumerated several types of route leaks. In this document, we first examine which of those route-leak types are detected and mitigated by the existing origin validation (OV) {[}RFC 6811{]} and BGPSEC path validation {[}I-D.ietf-sidr-bgpsec-protocol{]}. Where the current OV and BGPSEC protocols don't offer a solution, this document suggests an enhancement that would extend the route-leak detection and mitigation capability of BGPSEC. The solution can be implemented in BGP without necessarily tying it to BGPSEC. Incorporating the solution in BGPSEC is one way of implementing it in a secure way. We do not claim to have provided a solution for all possible types of route leaks, but the solution covers several, especially considering some significant route-leak attacks or occurrences that have been observed in recent years. The document also includes a stopgap method for detection and mitigation of route leaks for the phase when BGPSEC (path validation) is not yet deployed but only origin validation is deployed.}, }