North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: IP Filtering / CIDR Block Size / SprintLink
On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, David Schwartz wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Alex P. Rudnev wrote: > > > It's not big difference for us if there is 1 or 10 big ISP who make > > filtering. > > > I must repeat - it's not important for the small ISP and small > > enterprises how many ISP over the world produce filtering - it's > > important if the filtering exist somewhere or not. > > Well, that's not quite true. If it's only one or two and they > don't filter their own customers, an ISP can simply get a T1 to everyone > who filters and keep their small blocks working. > It's amazing - if I'll recomend our small ISP bye 256K link Moscow/USA (Sprint), guess what they say. But I am misunderstanded at all - first (in September or earlier) no one Registry over the world could not allocate for multi-home customer address space less than /19 (32 networks) and this prevented many enterprices or institutes from multihome connection to the Internet; just now (due to your answers) nobody filter our 195.xx or other RIPE's blocks except to /24 prefix; does it mean customers can get multihome access if they have /22 or /20 address space? And why Spring (and AGIS) have changed their filtering policy? Was it my imagination or they have filtered 195.xx block to /19 prefixes? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|