|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: /19 addresses and redundancy
Actually, AGIS currently filters like this: We filter everything at /24. We will apply next-hop-self to all exchange point peering sessions. We expect peers to do likewise and we will route map if necessary. We dropped the filtering of smaller net blocks to facilitate multi-homed customers. We used to feel that the total size of the routing tables was a significant issue but we have seen it hit around 90,000 on a really bad net day and we have been able to hold the tables. Our GRFs are equiped to hold a table with 250,000 routes. I don't know how close to this total the table could successfully hold but it's certainly more than the tables today. CIDR has also helped to lower the total route table size. So AGIS has elected to opt for the solution which will serve the customer the best and we accept every /24 and larger announcement. > >Agis also has a policy statement: > >We will filter TWD at /24. > We will filter 206+ at /19. > We will filter everything else at /16. > We will apply next-hop-self to all exchange point peering sessions. > We expect peers to do likewise and we will route map if necessary. > > >Again, whether these are adhered to strictly by these two providers, or any >others, will remain to be seen when you give it a try. > >Keep persuing your own addressing in the meantime. *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* | Harold Willison AGIS Network Engineering | * Network Engineer 313-730-5151 * | News Admin. 313-730-1130 | | [email protected] 24 hours a day, 7 days a week | * [email protected] [email protected] * | http://www.agis.net | \*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*/
|