03/05/97 Internet Routing Problems
labovit at merit.edu
Thu Mar 6 16:28:03 UTC 1997
Two quick points:
* The RA route servers no longer exist. Around January 1 of this year, the NSF
sponsored route servers were decomissioned. At serveral exchange points, Route
Server services are now being provided by the commercially funded RSNG project
(see http://www.rsng.net). Other aspects of the RA project (including some
research, RPSL, and IRR management/development) have continued.
* The RSNG route servers announce routes according to policy registered in the
IRR. Any routes not explicitly allowed by policy (RFC-1918 routes, default,
etc.) are effectively filtered in announcements to all RS peers.
at Thu, 06 Mar 1997 15:39:13 GMT, you wrote:
> > This is a prinicpal example of why people should be filtering on
> > both inbound & outbound announcements of default & RFC1918 address
> > space.
> Well we do this (we also filter out some other things we
> don't want to hear from other people), but this set me
> thinking. Is there anyone who actually has a good reason
> to propogate default and reserved addresses through the RA?
> Wouldn't it be a good move for the RA itself to filter
> these announcements (in addition to what's in the policy)?
> Alex Bligh
> Xara Networks
Craig Labovitz labovit at merit.edu
Merit Network, Inc. http://www.merit.edu/~labovit
4251 Plymouth Road, Suite C. (313) 764-0252 (office)
Ann Arbor, MI 48105-2785 (313) 647-3185 (fax)
More information about the NANOG