Jay: >When we (as7018) were preparing to begin dropping invalid routes >received from peers earlier this year, that is exactly the kind of >analysis we did. In our case we rolled our own with a two-pass >process: we first found all the traffic to/from invalid routes by a >bgp community we gave them, then outside of our flow analysis tool we >further filtered the traffic for invalid routes which were covered by >less-specific not-invalid routes. What remained was the traffic we >would lose once invalid routes were dropped. Had the pmacct >capability existed at that time, we would have used it.
We (NIST) did a detailed analysis of Invalid routes (with Routeviews data) that was presented at IETF 101: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/slides-101-sidrops-origin-validation-policy-considerations-for-dropping-invalid-routes-00 See slides 10-13. We tried to drill down on Invalid routes which were covered by less-specific not-invalid routes. We examined questions like: how often does the less-specific route have the same origin AS (OAS) as the Invalid, and, if not, then how frequently is the OAS of the less specific route a transit provider of the OAS of the Invalid route? We plan to update the results periodically. Sriram
