[26153] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Verio Decides what parts of the internet to drop
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Austin Schutz)
Mon Dec 6 17:04:09 1999
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 14:02:46 -0800
From: Austin Schutz <tex@shrubbery.net>
To: NANOG <nanog@merit.edu>
Message-ID: <19991206140246.C14758@shrubbery.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <199912062110.NAA10183@mail.crl.com>; from gherbert@crl.com on Mon, Dec 06, 1999 at 01:10:30PM -0800
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
>I am not sure whether the danger in opening up the B space for
>/17 blocks is particularly bad, but lacking a single consistent
>policy body with sufficient clue about both the Tier-1 backbone
>issues and the address allocation issues, it's hard to fault
>any given ISP for insisting on /16s in B space.
>
Sounds good, but what exactly does that mean? Does any end network
capable of justifying a /24 then get a routable chunk, thus blowing up the
tables? What if you could do it based upon traffic generation? That would be
difficult to verify, and the definition for 'large' amounts of traffic is
ever changing.
So, if we say that a /20 is a sufficiently large amount of space to
get a routable chunk, then they would be able to get it from ARIN anyway,
and we're back to square one.
In the far term as space becomes scarce we will need to find a solution
to wasted B space, but that is several years out. Perhaps by that time routers
will have so much memory and CPU as to make an extra ~4 million possible routes
negligible.
Austin
