How polluted is 1/8?

Joel M Snyder Joel.Snyder at Opus1.COM
Wed Feb 3 14:10:07 CST 2010


> Having this data is useful, but I can't help to think it would be
> more useful if it were compared with 27/8, or other networks.  Is
> this slightly worse, or significantly worse than other networks?

I have only anecdotal information regarding 45/8.

45/8 is assigned to Interop, and as such it is brought up-and-down as 
Interop's shows move in and out of convention centers.  Starting at 
least 5 years ago, it has proved impractical to start announcing 45/8, 
since this causes immediate and massive amounts of traffic to flow into 
the show network.

The last time that I know that the full 45/8 was announced, traffic 
settled down to about a full T3's worth of bandwidth before the network 
engineers started announcing smaller /16 chunks as actually needed. 
Even /16 has proved impractical while the network is being built-out, 
before the show, because the build-out site typically has T1-ish 
bandwidth---again, saturated with a /16 being announced.

This information is very different from the RIPE Labs experiment which I 
think showed that certain "obvious" addresses (1.1.1.1 seemed to be the 
kicker in my short reading of their report) were being mis-used heavily. 
  But I suspect that 27/8 would have similar issues to 45/8.

However, it is not clear to me that this is different from any other /8. 
  In other words, for those that have a /8, they probably DO have to put 
up with a T3-worth of garbage flowing their way before they move the 
first useful packet.  However, you don't get a /8 unless a T3 is small 
potatoes to you, hence...


jms
-- 
Joel M Snyder, 1404 East Lind Road, Tucson, AZ, 85719
Senior Partner, Opus One       Phone: +1 520 324 0494
jms at Opus1.COM                http://www.opus1.com/jms




More information about the NANOG mailing list