AS8300 - Swisscom hijacking.. Just what are you testing?

Suresh Ramasubramanian ops.lists at gmail.com
Wed Feb 1 20:26:18 CST 2012


On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote:
>>> They do internal aggregation of common prefixes to keep their internal
>>> tables small, see for instance this rather old preso:
>>>
>>> http://www.swinog.ch/meetings/swinog7/BGP_filtering-swinog.ppt
>
> why should swisscom pay for your traffic engineering?

Nobody at all is asking them to pay for it.  But do you seriously
expect their routing tables to become full to bursting because, for
example, they checked the ARIN route registry, RADB etc instead of
blindly using minimum prefix size defaults?

Or are swamp space legacy IP ranges with minimum prefix size of /24
that easy to get in this day and age?

-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists at gmail.com)



More information about the NANOG mailing list