[168575] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Are specific "route" objects in RIR databases needed?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tore Anderson)
Thu Jan 30 12:13:20 2014
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:13:03 +0100
From: Tore Anderson <tore@fud.no>
To: Job Snijders <job.snijders@hibernianetworks.com>,
Martin T <m4rtntns@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140130170130.GO427@Eleanor.local>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
* Job Snijders
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 06:51:59PM +0200, Martin T wrote:
>
>> for example there is a small company with /22 IPv4 allocation from
>> RIPE in European region. This company is dual-homed and would like to
>> announce 4x /24 prefixes to both ISPs. Both ISP's update their
>> prefix-lists automatically based on records in RIPE database. For
>> example Level3 uses this practice at least in Europe. If this small
>> company creates a "route" object for it's /22 allocation, then is it
>> enough? Theoretically this would cover all four /24 networks. Or in
>> which situation it is useful/needed to have "route" object for each
>> /24 prefix?
>
> You should create a route object for each route that you announce, if
> you announce 4 x /24 you should create a route: object for each /24.
+1
> ps. Can you please send 20 dollarcent per /24 to my paypal account
> (job@instituut.net) with the reference "deaggregation fee"?
Indeed.
Martin, I'd suggest announcing the 4 x /24s to each ISP tagged with the
no-export community in order to achieve whatever you are trying to do,
*in addition* to the covering /22. That way you're not polluting Job,
my, and everyone else's routing tables more than necessary, only your
own ISPs', but then again you're actually paying them for the privilege.
Tore
