North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Deaggregation Disease

  • From: Rob Evans
  • Date: Fri Jul 21 09:19:48 2006
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=WNhoVu4PLDzxk5/ce0oxv9MyayZs4vGkq2vQhCAk0Dvw+sTluAXpHEwNbid0ocDr92b5oCQhbqmv6NDDr2KU9CIfduw9HIimaDUt28A/plpKrZQZXcI0LeNRDLGEvew5aFA0fpzpKJqRJ4qngJdG+87H0aYuIP8dcy1VxB+6Za0=

Just to make it clear: AS4151 was 9 month ago. Now we see history again
with new actors. (I guess the actual increase was done by various ASN of
RENATER).


I'm curious how you reach the conclusion that RENATER has contributed
to many of the prefixes over the last week.  They do seem to have
announced a bunch of prefixes that could be aggregated, but look at
the following report:

http://www.cidr-report.org/as-prefixes.txt

There seem to be a whole load of ASNs that have deaggregated.  AS5416,
AS5639, AS6140, AS9121, AS13049, AS16130, AS17849,  AS18049 (that's as
far as I got before getting bored).  Some of these are advertising the
covering prefix too, so they're certainly aware of how to aggregate.

Rob