[151045] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Sat Mar 10 06:07:47 2012
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <596B74B410EE6B4CA8A30C3AF1A155EA09D0C920@RWC-MBX1.corp.seven.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 03:06:07 -0800
To: George Bonser <gbonser@seven.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 9, 2012, at 11:01 PM, George Bonser wrote:
>> I haven't heard anyone advocate accepting less than a /48. I think =
/48
>> is a reasonable "You must be this tall to ride" barrier.
>>=20
>> Beyond that, YMMV.
>>=20
>> Owen
>=20
> Apparently AS6939 has at various times :) I remember getting some /64 =
announcements from HE. I haven't seen one lately, though. I'm only =
filtering one /64 route these days announced by AS4651=20
>=20
Like any other ISP, we're run by humans and humans occasionally make =
mistakes.
If you saw anything longer than a /64 from 6939, it was the result of =
such an event.
If you see anything longer than a /64 from 6939, please let us know and =
we will fix it.
We have never advocated accepting longer than /48s to my knowledge.
Owen
