[624] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: number of unaggregated class C's in swamp?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Yakov Rekhter)
Sat Sep 30 22:28:34 1995
To: Dennis Ferguson <dennis@mci.net>
cc: nanog@merit.edu, cidrd@iepg.org
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 29 Sep 95 20:16:54 EDT."
<95Sep29.201658-0400_edt.196374+49@romford.reston.mci.net>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 95 19:19:00 PDT
From: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@cisco.com>
Dennis,
> I like the idea of measuring each and every class-A-sized block
> against some standard separately, since a lot of the class-C space has
> been allocated to regional registries this way and it inconveniences
> those places which have done the best the least. I'm less attached to
> the number 1200 in particular, but I do think an explicit target should
> be chosen which represents both a tractable limit to design big routers for
> and which allows the implementation of efficient address allocation strategie
s
> which won't have to be tighened over time. I do note that 1200 is
> close to the threatened /18 address filter, but this is mostly accidental.
> I'd much rather see each space filled with /14's and /20's, and even
> an occasional /23 or /25, as appropriate and as long as the filled block
> was only 1200 (or N, for some well-defined N) routes, rather than
> picking an arbitrary, one-size-fits-all filter limit. The latter is
> a sign of failure.
So, perhaps we should just look at the total amount of IP address space
advertised by a provider in its routing advertisements, then divide
this amount by the number of routes the provider advertises, and
see whether the resulting number meets the goal.
Yakov.
