[184365] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: /27 the new /24
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Hammett)
Fri Oct 2 11:32:12 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 10:32:03 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <9A7AEF1F-36C5-4B9A-BF4D-643B8089A373@matthew.at>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Much m ore than I'm willing to spend. ;-)=20
-----=20
Mike Hammett=20
Intelligent Computing Solutions=20
http://www.ics-il.com=20
Midwest Internet Exchange=20
http://www.midwest-ix.com=20
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew Kaufman" <matthew@matthew.at>=20
To: "Justin Wilson - MTIN" <lists@mtin.net>=20
Cc: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org>=20
Sent: Friday, October 2, 2015 9:48:33 AM=20
Subject: Re: /27 the new /24=20
A /24 isn't that expensive yet...=20
Matthew Kaufman=20
(Sent from my iPhone)=20
> On Oct 2, 2015, at 7:32 AM, Justin Wilson - MTIN <lists@mtin.net> wrote:=
=20
>=20
> I was in a discussion the other day and several Tier2 providers were talk=
ing about the idea of adjusting their BGP filters to accept prefixes smalle=
r than a /24. A few were saying they thought about going down to as small a=
s a /27. This was mainly due to more networks coming online and not having =
even a /24 of IPv4 space. The first argument is against this is the potenti=
al bloat the global routing table could have. Many folks have worked hard f=
or years to summarize and such. others were saying they would do a /26 or b=
igger.=20
>=20
> However, what do we do about the new networks which want to do BGP but on=
ly can get small allocations from someone (either a RIR or one of their ups=
treams)?=20
>=20
> Just throwing that out there. Seems like an interesting discussion.=20
>=20
>=20
> Justin Wilson=20
> j2sw@mtin.net=20
>=20
> ---=20
> http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO=20
> xISP Solutions- Consulting =E2=80=93 Data Centers - Bandwidth=20
>=20
> http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman=20
> Internet Exchange - Peering - Distributed Fabric=20
>=20
