[PDB Tech] route-server information add-on

[Job Snijders]

On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:17:19AM +0100, Arnold Nipper wrote:
> On 12.12.2016 10:06, Job Snijders wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 04:58:22AM +0100, Arnold Nipper wrote:
> >> Jon,
> >> On 12.12.2016 04:41, Jon Nistor wrote:
> >>> I had a peer ask that I add an entry for the TorIX route-servers as
> >>> entities in peeringDB as their system uses automation against
> >>> peeringDB for configurations, etc.
> >>>
> >>> It got me thinking, could it be possible to add in an option for
> >>> route-servers under Internet Exchange points that one could query
> >>> via the API?  Would it be worth it?  Is there an alternative to this
> >>> that would work (i've listed one ref below).
> >>>
> >>> ref: https://www.peeringdb.com/net/11429
> >>
> >> route servers belong to an ASN / network. Simply configure them as
> >> networks as did some other 50 IXP already (hint: search for "route
> >> server").
> >>
> >> What else is needed?
> > 
> > I think what is requested here is a programmatic way to establish ahead
> > of time whether the BGP speaker will confirm to RFC 4271 or RFC 7947. I
> > agree with you that putting the words "Route Server" in the name of the
> > "net" object is an excellent start, but that's mostly there for humans.
> > 
> > Will Hargrave brought up some configuration settings that are only
> > applicable to Route Servers and not to normal peers. (And I'd like to
> > add to the list whether do "set ip next-hop peer-address" or not)
> > 
> > A developer can already identify which ASNs belong to the operators of
> > an IXP by following the organisational object:
> > 
> >     example: https://www.peeringdb.com/net/11429 belongs to
> >     https://www.peeringdb.com/org/7 and https://www.peeringdb.com/ix/14
> >     also belongs to https://www.peeringdb.com/org/7 
> > 
> > What is lacking however, is for 'net/11429' to declare "I am a route
> > server, treat me as one".
> > 
> > Maybe a boolean should be added to "is_routeserver" to the 'net' object
> > data model, which can be set to true if the ASN acts as a RFC 7947
> > compliant BGP speaker.
> > 
> 
> Looks like a straight approach but might be not failsafe, because
> everyone can set this flag.
> 
> Wouldn't it make sense to wire the ASN used by the route servers in the
> IXP object?

No, a programmer can already search for the ASNs connected to the IXP
operated by the IXP themselves, I should you how net/11429 -> org/7 &&
ix/14 -> org/7. All that is needed is a boolean indicating whether a
network is a route server or not. The net effect is that you have a
programmatic way to deduce which one is the office network, and which
one is the route server.

Also, I've seen Route Servers in the wild which were not operated by the
IXP themselves. I'd consider it a feature if everyone can set the flag. :-)

Kind regards,

Job