IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy
Nathan Ward
nanog at daork.net
Tue Oct 13 07:44:17 UTC 2009
On 13/10/2009, at 5:46 PM, Kevin Loch wrote:
> I think he was pointing out that extra routes due to "slow start"
> policies should not be a factor in v6. My guess is that is about
> half of the "extra" routes announced today, the other half being
> TE routes.
You can pretty easily figure out how many advertised prefixes are
intentional de-aggregates, and you can get a fairly good idea as to
how many of them are for TE as well I expect, by looking for different
AS paths.
Someone mentioned some slides earlier in this thread by Vince Fuller
at APRICOT early '07 that from memory have pretty good data on this.
--
Nathan Ward
More information about the NANOG
mailing list