Filter-based routing table management (was: Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size)

John Curran jcurran at
Mon Sep 30 23:41:07 UTC 2013

On Sep 29, 2013, at 12:49 AM, Blake Dunlap <ikiris at> wrote:
> Yes, I was lazy in most of the adaptation, but I think it serves a
> good starting point for market based suggestions to the route slot
> problem.
> Your post advocates a
> (X) technical ( ) legislative (X) market-based ( ) vigilante
> approach to fighting spam^H^H^H^H route deaggregation. Your idea will
> not work. Here is why it won't work. 
> ...

There's actually no new technology involved, and you're overlooking the fact 
that there already _is_ market operating when it comes to routing table slots - 
try asking your ISP if they'll accept and propagate more specifics and your
answer is going based on imputed worth to them as a customer...  you just 
have no visibility into their assessment of your value, nor any way to make
the judgement yourself and pay accordingly.


More information about the NANOG mailing list