jyy at merit.edu
Fri Mar 11 21:19:23 UTC 1994
I am not aware of any concrete plan. Anyone? If no, let's work out a plan.
The issues, which I can think of for now, needs to be addressed here are:
1. Make sure no non-private ASs (for lack of a better work)
which are neigher CIDRized nor defaulting to other ASs.
Existence of such AS will break the reachability of
CIDR routes if individual classful net routes are
replaced with CIDR routes.
We need to set up a date by which we can assume
all the ASs are either CIDRing and/or defaulting.
2. Gain more confidenece with the newly deployed CIDR in the networks
More aggressive testing: injecting test CIDR routes to the
Internet, announce it to the bgpd list along with a couple
of pingable hosts in the aggregate.
3. Establish procedures for ASs to announce the replacement of
individual net routes to aid the detection of potential impact/problem
of removing such routes from the Internet.
Andrew(?) suggested that ASs announce to the bgpd mailing
list the list of individual intented to be replaced by
an aggregate route several days prior to the remove.
This should be a good start, shall we agree on do
that? Is 3 days in advance reasonable ?
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 1994 11:52:12 EST
To: jyy at merit.edu
cc: regional-techs at merit.edu, bgpd at merit.edu
From: yakov at watson.ibm.com
Return-Path: yakov at watson.ibm.com
Ref: Your note of Thu, 10 Mar 1994 10:50:24 -0500
>I believe it is still the case at the moment (test & trial stage)
Are there any plans to move beyond the "test & trial stage" ?
If yes, then do we have any concrete dates for when the
individual networks (that form a single prefix) will be
removed from the routing ?
More information about the NANOG