|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Filtering levels (was RE: multi-homing without the BGP (wasRE: Packet Loss))
Depends on what class it's in. Let me explain further. Verio, in their infinite wisdom, has decided that they are going to throw CIDR right out the window. We own 64.240.0.0-64.242.255.255. We advertise MANY smaller blocks of this space obviously, and what we have found is that in that space (since it is "Class A" space, remember we don't know what CIDR is since we're Verio) is that Verio does not accept anything smaller than a /20. Now many of our customers run BGP with us and advertise a /24 only, I guess they're SOL as far as Verio is concerned (actually if it's our space they're probably going to see the larger aggregate as well, so it's not as big of a deal, but still mighty annoying). Oh, and did I mention that Verio isn't even one of our peers? Oh well. On Fri, 15 Dec 2000, Jonathan Disher wrote: > > On Fri, 15 Dec 2000, Daniel Golding wrote: > > > advertise blocks smaller than a /20 to each other (/24 is a more normal > > filtering level these days). Also ensure that whichever of the upstreams > > Is it safe to assume[*] that an announced /23 will not be filtered by any > major (or even the minor) backbones? We just got our ARIN allocation (and > I won't go into that, the lag time was all my fault), and I'm currently > planning allocation for some remote offices and a couple of hosted > buildouts. I'm hoping to not have to announce anything larger than a /23 > from any one site unless necessary. > > -j > > [*] - It's never safe to assume anything internet related; relatively > speaking, is it safe... > > -Jonathan Disher > -Systems and Network Engineer, Web Operations > -Internet Pictures Corporation, Palo Alto, CA > -[v] (650) 388-0497 | [p] (877) 446-9311 | [e] [email protected] > >
|