[40897] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: multi-homing fixes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steve Noble)
Fri Aug 24 20:46:31 2001
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 17:54:30 -0700
From: Steve Noble <snoble@sonn.com>
To: Brian Whalen <bri@sonicboom.org>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20010824175430.A62329@tabby.sonn.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Brian Whalen <bri@sonicboom.org>, nanog@merit.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20010824171714.X19150-100000@cx175057-a.ocnsd1.sdca.home.com>; from bri@sonicboom.org on Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 05:20:17PM -0700
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 05:20:17PM -0700, Brian Whalen wrote:
>
> The global visibility point you address isn't that hard to solve. Most
> service providers you buy service from, if you tell em you're going to
> multihome to multiple providers, well they all know that a mask longer
> than /24 id to be filtered for sure and will allocate a /24 just based on
> multihoming, even if a smaller portion of the ips is all that is needed.
> Problems occur when you try to announce the /24 out of classful A or B
> space.
Now that's confusing.. doesn't CIDR supposedly make it so that one IP is
no better or worse then another? Why do people base their filtering policies
on where things are in the "Classful" space? How is 64/8 any different then
216/8.. they allocate out of both of them, it's a crapshoot what you get
since ARIN denys responsibility to provide routable IP space, yet there is
space that is "more" routable than other space.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Steven Noble / Network Janitor / Be free my soul and leave this world alone :
: My views = My views != The views of any of my past or present employers :
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
