Closed SichangHe closed 8 months ago
Surprisingly, although unrec_import_empty
and unrec_export_empty
has similar averages, much more AS have the latter. This is also shown in the 75 percentile. All these ASes have no other unrecorded cases.
The large stripe of unrec_aut_num
shows that many ASes are not recorded in the IRR.
Most of the rest are unrecorded routes and AS Sets.
Are the unrecorded aut-num objects concentrated in one or two RIR/NIRs?
On Fri, Nov 10, 2023, 02:04 Steven Hé (Sīchàng) @.***> wrote:
Surprisingly, although unrec_import_empty and unrec_export_empty has similar averages, much more AS have the latter. This is also shown in the 75 percentile. All these ASes have no other unrecorded cases.
The large stripe of unrec_aut_num shows that many ASes are not recorded in the IRR.
Most of the rest are unrecorded routes and AS Sets.
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/SichangHe/internet_route_verification/issues/92#issuecomment-1805092124, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACPO574ZQCJ3XHQZAPAUHLYDWYUFAVCNFSM6AAAAAA7FTXYO2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQMBVGA4TEMJSGQ . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.*** com>
Here's a list of ASes with unrec_aut_num
: as_w_unrec_aut_num.csv
I don't have a good way to know which registry they are in because we don't record that information.
For the list of missing ASes (which is what you are probably asking for), I need to write a script to generate all the reports again and extract them out from the report items.
None of the above 17108 ASes have associated AutNum objects in the IRR (just realized that is the reason why they are reported as unrecorded in the first place after trying to extract source
for the registry they are in).
I could find some of them as origin
in route
/route6
objects, though. However, according to #76, there are only 8583 more ASes specified as origin
than there are AutNum objects. This might be caused by a subset of ASes that have route objects but no AutNum objects.
I rg'ed 10 of them, they have routes in RADB, ARIN, JPIRR, ALTDB, LEVEL3, and get referred to as members in additionally RIPE, NTTCOM. So, they are not concentrated in a few registries.
I had a look at some of the ASes, they seem to be registered in the ARIN region (whois ASNUM
) gets a response from whois.arin.net
, but when we query the routing registry (whois -h rr.arin.net ASNUM
) we do not get anything. It seems OK to consider these ASes as not having any rule.
@cunha e-mail Randy about what could this be.
The 5 I checked had entries on whois.arin.net, but not rr.arin.net, which I think we should consider similarly to ASes not declaring any import/export rue.
On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 9:25 PM Steven Hé (Sīchàng) < @.***> wrote:
I rg'ed 10 of them, they have routes in RADB, ARIN, JPIRR, ALTDB, LEVEL3, and get referred to as members in additionally RIPE, NTTCOM. So, they are not concentrated in a few registries.
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/SichangHe/internet_route_verification/issues/92#issuecomment-1806592256, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACPO55IWGH2FCF4ULTMCKTYD3AXBAVCNFSM6AAAAAA7FTXYO2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQMBWGU4TEMRVGY . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: @.***>
Factoring in the special case ratio (blank part for non-special cases):
Interestingly, some ASes have unrec_import_empty
mixed with non-unrecorded cases, but not (edit: very little) the other way round (export).
Those non-unrecorded cases have to be exports (edit: for the first case. For the case with unrec_export_empty
with non-unrecorded cases, those are imports).
All RIBs.
AS-unrec-case-percentages-stacked-area-squared.pdf AS-unrec-case-percentages-stacked-area.pdf
Generated using https://github.com/SichangHe/internet_route_verification_meta/commit/79eeb32325a9002f877ffc511f23645be15b12bf and data in #89.