[50385] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: routing table size
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ralph Doncaster)
Sat Jul 27 13:37:17 2002
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 13:39:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ralph Doncaster <ralph@istop.com>
To: "jlewis@lewis.org" <jlewis@lewis.org>
Cc: "nanog@merit.edu" <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0207271226030.20657-100000@redhat1.mmaero.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> Off your network, your legal rights are pretty limited. I (and I'm sure
> lots of other admins) block at the /24 boundry. Anything you announce
> from /25 to /32 will be ignored on my network. Some providers choose to
> block according to RIR allocation sizes. To me, that's not worth the
> maintenance hassle. To them, it may mean the difference between having to
> upgrade or replace large numbers of routers last year or sometime in the
> next few years.
I've never suggested accepting /25's thru /32's. I'm wondering if the
people saying I should not de-aggregage my /20 actually practice what they
preach and filter /24's and don't globally announce /24's from their
customers.
-Ralph
