[58390] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Internet core scale and market-based address allocation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (alex@yuriev.com)
Sun May 11 12:51:15 2003
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 12:56:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: alex@yuriev.com
To: bdragon@gweep.net
Cc: bmanning@karoshi.com, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20030510235501.86393.qmail@sidehack.sat.gweep.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> > > Route advertisements do not fit any existing model, since an advertisement
> > > affects all members of the system equally, no matter how far away they are
> > > from the advertisement.
> >
> > Er. Not at all.
> > Please review routing 101.
> > Pop quiz. define prefix filtering and proxy aggregation
> >
> > --bill
>
> Reread my email dated 4/17/2003 with subject of "selective auto-aggregation"
> I think you'll find I've already given some thought on proxy aggregation
> as better than prefix-filtering for maintaining connectivity while limitting
> the effects of someone else's deaggregation.
Sprint did that in 1994-95. Or at least threatened to do it when one ISP
that now had been bought by a promsing local ISP decided not to aggregate.
The Sprint's move was enough to force that ISP to aggregate.
Alex
