/24s run amuck
Stephen J. Wilcox
steve at telecomplete.co.uk
Tue Jan 13 22:03:56 UTC 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
>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list