Verio Decides what parts of the internet to drop

Travis Pugh tdp at
Sat Dec 4 23:44:08 UTC 1999

I've been lurking and looking at this conversation too long ... my head is
spinning.  Alex says there are many reasons causing people to announce B
nets with short prefixes, and he is entirely right.  The primary one would
be that a client, by some inexplicable reasoning, expects their Internet
service to be up and running reliably at least 95% of the time.

The disturbing message I have been able to glean from this thread is that:

- If you need reliability, get a /19
- If you are a small customer, using only a /24 for connectivity (and thus
helping to slow depletion) you are not BIG enough to expect multi-path
reliability into your network
- If you are a big provider, not only do you not have to provide a
consistent level of service to your customers, but you are free to block
them (and anyone else from other providers) arbitrarily when they spend a
good deal of money to augment your service with someone else's

The gist of the conversation, IMO, is that customers can't have reliability
with one provider, but they will be blocked from having reliability through
multiple providers if their addresses happen to be in the "wrong" space.
Something's wrong with that.


Eeeevillll consultant

----- Original Message -----
From: Alex P. Rudnev <alex at>
To: Randy Bush <rbush at>
Cc: <doug at>; <nanog at>
Sent: Saturday, December 04, 1999 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: Verio Decides what parts of the internet to drop

> It should be your problem. You simply loss the part of connectivity...
> The real world is more complex than you drawn below. There is many reasons
> causing people to announce class-B networks with the short prefixes.
> On Thu, 2 Dec 1999, Randy Bush wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 13:00:17 -0800
> > From: Randy Bush <rbush at>
> > To: doug at
> > Cc: nanog at
> > Subject: Re: Verio Decides what parts of the internet to drop
> >
> >
> > > Apparently for their convenience Verio has decided what parts of the
> > > Internet I can get to.
> >
> > verio does not accept from peers announcements of prefixes in classic b
> > space longer than the allocations of the regional registries.
> >
> > we believe our customers and the internet as a whole will be less
> > inconvenienced by our not listening to sub-allocation prefixes than to
> > major portions of the network down as has happened in the past.  some
> > may remember the 129/8 disaster which took significant portions of the
> > down for up to two days.
> >
> > the routing databases are not great, and many routers can not handle
> > big enough to allow a large to irr filter large peers.  and some large
> > do not register routes.
> >
> > so we and others filter at allocation boundaries and have for a long
> > we assure you we do not do it without serious consideration or to
> > nanog readers.
> >
> > > With no notification.
> >
> > verio's policy has been constant and public.
> >
> > randy
> >
> >
> Aleksei Roudnev,
> (+1 415) 585-3489 /San Francisco CA/

More information about the NANOG mailing list