[1173] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: CIDR Aggregation Tool
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Avi Freedman)
Mon Nov 27 13:23:54 1995
From: Avi Freedman <freedman@netaxs.com>
To: jon@branch.com (Jon Zeeff)
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 13:04:14 -0500 (EST)
Cc: jon@branch.com, big-internet@munnari.OZ.AU, cidrd@iepg.org,
nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <m0tK7jS-000Nj7C@aero.branch.com> from "Jon Zeeff" at Nov 27, 95 12:52:45 pm
[Please take any other responses just to cidrd. This is copied to big-inet
and nanog so people will see the followup request. I just wanted the
announcement to go out maximally, but the details and responses are of
no interet to nanog as a whole...]
> > Our route table has:
> > *> 198.111.252.0 192.41.177.145 <--- agis
> > *> 198.111.252.0/22 192.41.177.181 <--- mci
> > *> 198.111.253.0 192.41.177.145 <--- agis
> > *> 198.111.255.0 192.41.177.145 <--- agis
>
> This isn't what agis is supposed to be announcing, I'll have to
> ask them again to announce 198.111.252/22. There's a couple less
> routes already :-).
>
> Once that is fixed, further aggregation of 198.111.252.0 (say into
> 198.111/16, as a non real example) would change our routing (in
> ways we don't want it changed), even with your "next hop the same"
> criteria because of the additional meaning that specifics have in
> terms of priority.
Well, we only see 198.111.252, 253, and 255 from AGIS, so there's no
danger of AGIS over-aggregating even if they combined 252 & 253...
> I agree that your tool is usefull in identifying _potential_ savings.
That's all it's for.
Avi
