North American Network Operators Group

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

RE: /24s run amuck

  • From: Stephen J. Wilcox
  • Date: Tue Jan 13 17:18:16 2004

> 1. If filtering is used, as suggested by someone, what happens to the 
> 	small/mid-sized company that is multi-homed out of an ISP's
> 	/20 or larger block?  In this case, I can see an ISP with a /20
> 	bust that up to /21s smaller to accommodate this user.
> 2. Wasn't /24 filtering something that a few large ISP's did a few
> 	years ago and everyone complained? I don't have a reference here
> 	but I seem to remember some flack about that.

Both of these points are why filtering is not a good solution, you just dont 
know what those netblocks are that you are missing, it needs to be controlled by 
the ISPs themselves.

> 3. What happens in the case of a carrier that has given /24s to a 
> 	downstream out of different blocks?

This is not imho unnecessary deaggregation and not a problem, however where 
possible the blocks should be contiguous and aggregatable (unlikely), and dont 
forget each block should be given on the basis that it will last the downstream 
quite a long time so that over a few years the downstream only accumulates a 
couple blocks anyhow.

> I guess the real question is this:
> 
> If X company can not be reached, how/who would you complain to?

If you are company X then its your fault and you should see where you went 
wrong! If you have a /26 that you're trying to route but no one is accepting it 
then consider that maybe you arent justifying your being an ISP..

> And would this be like the RR and AOL email filtering lists where
> we all complain, and this filtering is an effort by some 
> to force others to clean up their act?

Yeah kinda, same but different.. :)

Steve

> 
> Am I out in Left field?
> 
> Jim 
>