North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: multi-homing fixes

  • From: Steve Noble
  • Date: Fri Aug 24 19:50:38 2001

On Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 07:33:50PM -0400, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> And don't forget, if they had asked for address space back in
> 1988-1990 they would be announcing a /16, and using a /24 of it.

I had a much bigger email I postponed to see what happened in
this thread, that was part of it. It also included IANA's
allocation to themselves in the 192.0/16 (RESERVED) space.. It
would be interesting to see what would have happened if they
had allocated and annouced a /24 from the 64/8 space.  Would
Verio be unable to reach them? (You can substitute Verio for any
other heavily filtering provider)

What makes joe blow with his ancient /16 that he's using 7 hosts
on better then a site that wants to NOT waste space annoucing
a /24 that is invisible to part of the Internet due to filters.

> The average routing announcement has gotten smaller as a result
> of tighter allocation policies.  The use 80% rule and all that.

Which is valid..  Now on the other hand by saying "and if it's smaller 
then a /20 you will be filtered" you cause undue pressure on people to
"spin" their designs in ways to show that they can use a /20 and get
the allocation from ARIN directly.

These two arguments cause some issues with eachother.

> Of course all the growth is in small prefixes.  You can't get a 
> large prefix these days, and if you get a smaller one that should
> be aggregatable to a larger prefix next time you ask the likelyhood
> it will still be there when you ask for it is low.

The whole problem seems to me to be a lack of a micro-allocation 
policy, and an agreement from providers that they will not filter that

: Steven Noble / Network Janitor / Be free my soul and leave this world alone :
:   My views = My views != The views of any of my past or present employers   :