[184371] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: /27 the new /24
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Fri Oct 2 12:00:34 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP-guGXzT00=hMbfPOx6tNxktCva4aKRdove7_Xy1wHVJJQNpw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 21:25:17 +0530
To: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Besides which more than one provider filters by a minimum prefix length per /=
8 - wasn't Swisscom or someone similar doing that? So multi homing with ev=
en a /24 is somewhat patchy in terms of effectiveness
--srs
> On 02-Oct-2015, at 8:54 PM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
>=20
>> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Justin Wilson - MTIN <lists@mtin.net> wr=
ote:
>> However, what do we do about the new networks which
>> want to do BGP but only can get small allocations from
>> someone (either a RIR or one of their upstreams)?
>=20
> Hi Justin,
>=20
> Rent or sell them a /24 and make money. If they can't afford a /24 at
> today's market rate, why should the rest of us spend much more money
> upgrading routers to accommodate their advertisement?
>=20
> The annual systemic cost of carrying that prefix is still more than
> double the one-time cost of acquiring a /24. No doubt that gap will
> close, but there's no cost justification to change the /24 filters
> just yet.
>=20
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> William Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us
> Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
