[atnog] Fwd: Bogon ASN Filter Policy

[Mario Rosic]

Hallo,

interessant, dass in der Ankündigung von NTT nichts von Prefix Hijacking oder DDoS drinnen steht.
Wenn ich das richtig verstehe werden in letzter Zeit öfters Special Use AS Numbers genutzt, um Präfixe von anderen ASen zu announcen?

Liebe Grüße
Mario

Am 2016-06-07 um 09:00 schrieb Otmar Lendl:
> FYI,
>
> es tut sich ein bisschen was zum Thema Bogon filtering.
>
> Auf diversen Meetings der letzten Zeit haben wir immer mehr von
> prefix-hijacking gehört. Das ist für Spam-Versand eine sehr alte Masche,
> angeblich wird das jetzt aber auch für DDoS (genauer: injecting von
> spoofed packets) benutzt.
>
> otmar
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>
> TLP:GREEN
>
> NTT (2914), GTT (3257), AT&T (7018) and KPN (286) have publicly
> committed to deploy this style of policy in June/July 2016.
>
> NTT's outreach programme is effective, the amount of impacted prefixes
> in the DFZ has already dropped with 50% in the last two weeks.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Job
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Job Snijders <job at ntt.net> -----
>
> Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 21:41:38 +0200
> From: Job Snijders <job at ntt.net>
> To: nanog at nanog.org
> Cc: Jared Mauch <jmauch at us.ntt.net>
> Subject: Bogon ASN Filter Policy
>
> Dear fellow network operators,
>
> In July 2016, NTT Communications' Global IP Network AS2914 will deploy a
> new routing policy to block Bogon ASNs from its view of the default-free
> zone. This notification is provided as a courtesy to the network
> community at large.
>
> After the Bogon ASN filter policy has been deployed, AS 2914 will not
> accept route announcements from any eBGP neighbor which contains a Bogon
> ASN anywhere in the AS_PATH or its atomic aggregate attribute.
>
> The reasoning behind this policy is twofold:
>
>      - Private or Reserved ASNs have no place in the public DFZ. Barring
>        these from the DFZ helps improve accountability and dampen
>        accidental exposure of internal routing artifacts.
>
>      - All AS2914 devices support 4-byte ASNs. Any occurrence of "23456"
>        in the DFZ is a either a misconfiguration or software issue.
>
> We are undertaking this effort to improve the quality of routing data as
> part of the global ecosystem. This should improve the security posture
> and provide additional certainty [1] to those undertaking network
> troubleshooting.
>
> Bogon ASNs are currently defined as following:
>
>      0                       # Reserved RFC7607
>      23456                   # AS_TRANS RFC6793
>      64496-64511             # Reserved for use in docs and code RFC5398
>      64512-65534             # Reserved for Private Use RFC6996
>      65535                   # Reserved RFC7300
>      65536-65551             # Reserved for use in docs and code RFC5398
>      65552-131071            # Reserved
>      4200000000-4294967294   # Reserved for Private Use RFC6996
>      4294967295              # Reserved RFC7300
>
> A current overview of what are considered Bogon ASNs is maintained at
> NTT's Routing Policies page [2]. The IANA Autonomous System Number
> Registry [3] is closely tracked and the NTT Bogon ASN definitions are
> updated accordingly.
>
> We encourage network operators to consider deploying similar policies.
> Configuration examples for various platforms can be found here [4].
>
> NTT staff is monitoring current occurrences of Bogon ASNs in the routing
> system and reaching out to impacted parties on a weekly basis.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Job
>
> Contact persons:
>
>      Job Snijders <job at ntt.net>, Jared Mauch <jmauch at us.ntt.net>,
>      NTT Communications NOC <noc at ntt.net>
>
> References:
> [1]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thomson-postel-was-wrong-00
> [2]: http://www.us.ntt.net/support/policy/routing.cfm#bogon
> [3]: https://www.iana.org/assignments/as-numbers/as-numbers.xhtml
> [4]: http://as2914.net/bogon_asns/configuration_examples.txt
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> atnog mailing list
> atnog at atnog.at
> http://atnog.at/mailman/listinfo/atnog

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atnog.at/pipermail/atnog/attachments/20160607/1e0522bb/attachment.html>