Problem Statement and Considerations for ROA Mergence
draft-yan-sidr-roa-mergence-00
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Zhiwei Yan , Yu Fu , Xiaowei Liu , Guanggang Geng | ||
| Last updated | 2016-11-14 (Latest revision 2016-05-06) | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
The address space holder needs to issue an ROA object when it authorizes one or more ASes to originate routes to multiple prefixes. During the process of ROA issuance, the address space holder needs to specify an origin AS for a list of IP prefixes. Besides, the address space holder has a free choice to put multiple prefixes into a single ROA or issue separate ROAs for each prefix based on the current specification. This memo analyzes and presents some operational problems which may be caused by the misconfigurations of ROAs containing multiple IP prefixes. Some suggestions and considerations also have been proposed.
Authors
Zhiwei Yan
Yu Fu
Xiaowei Liu
Guanggang Geng
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)