[66513] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: /24s run amuck
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Payne)
Wed Jan 14 23:38:13 2004
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 23:37:36 -0500
From: John Payne <john@sackheads.org>
To: Daniel Golding <dgolding@burtongroup.com>,
"Patrick W.Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <BC2B126E.2275%dgolding@burtongroup.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--On Wednesday, January 14, 2004 3:36 PM -0500 Daniel Golding
<dgolding@burtongroup.com> wrote:
> There is one mechanism for helping to solve this. Is there an RFC,
> informational or otherwise that clearly specifies that BGP announcements
> to peers and transit providers must be aggregated to the greatest extent
> possible?
Just want to clarify that BGP announcements to peers should by default be
aggregated as far as possible, but can be completely deaggregated if both
parties agree.
For example, if you have a BGP session with my employer and we haven't
mentioned it recently, we would *love* deaggregation. Send us /32s, MEDs,
communities and we'll chew it up and ask for more.
But we're special - we don't have a network and we don't sell transit.
