Hey, anyone who wanna help improve the net stability?

Thu Sep 5 19:11:50 UTC 1996

> Avi pointed out:
> 
> The swamp is basically the old "Classful" address space.
> What Sean did was to say "You can use your old 'Class C's
> but I have to stop the table-size growth in *new allocations*".
> 
> =========
> Then apparently I have misunderstood what the swamp was/is.  I thought it
> was just an unaggregated area and didn't understand why.  Is there text
> somewhere that explains very clearly the swamp and the policies attached
> there to?

It's not necessarily unaggregated...

I'm not sure, it's possible that Sean might have described the swamp as
basically space above the a/b space and < 205/8.

> Is the swamp then bounded by class c addresses warranted as routable when
> they were handed out?  Are you saying then that the defaultless core

No, warranted as "ok, I can deal with routes from that space" by Sprint's
filters.

> routability of class c's from the swamp is, as of now, guaranteed?

Define "guarantee".  No, nothing is "guaranteed", but there'd be HUGE
objection to any new filtering policies that affected already-allocated-
and-routed space.

> Of the class cs from the swamp how many are now being routed at the
> defaultless core?  HOW MANY ADDITIONAL CLASS Cs FROM THE SWAMP ARE THERE

No clue, but we could find out.

> FOR WHICH THE OWNERS COULD DEMAND ROUTING?

Many :)

> In other words are these 5,000 new class c's just the beginning? Or are
> they, hopefully the end?

Hard to say, we'd have to see how many of the new /24s are actually
"Class C"s.

Avi