[75447] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The Cidr Report
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher L. Morrow)
Fri Nov 12 22:34:09 2004
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 03:31:26 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow@mci.com>
In-reply-to: <16789.24317.70726.401870@ran.psg.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: cidr-report@potaroo.net, nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Randy Bush wrote:
> >>> ASnum NetsNow NetsAggr NetGain % Gain Description
> >>>
> >>> AS18566 751 6 745 99.2% CVAD Covad Communications
> >>> AS4134 825 178 647 78.4% CHINANET-BACKBONE
> >>> No.31,Jin-rong Street
> >>> AS4323 794 223 571 71.9% TWTC Time Warner Telecom
> >>> AS6197 814 430 384 47.2% BNS-14 BellSouth Network
> >>> Solutions, Inc
> >>> AS22773 401 17 384 95.8% CXA Cox Communications Inc.
> >>> AS27364 413 45 368 89.1% ARMC Armstrong Cable Services
> >>> AS701 1230 884 346 28.1% UU UUNET Technologies, Inc.
> >>> AS22909 412 81 331 80.3% CMCS Comcast Cable
> >>> Communications, Inc.
> >> e.g. is AS18566 the origin AS for 751 prefixes that could be
> >> collapsed to 6?
> >
> > not to justify the expense, but perhaps covad is renumbering from one
> > block to another? Looking at their advertisments I see lots of /23 or /24
> > blocks inside their larger covering routes... So either they deaggregated
> > to renumber more gracefully, or they forgot their prefix-list outbound to
> > williams and exodus ?
> >
> > perhaps covad can explain? or silently cover up the 'mistake' (which is
> > acceptable as well...)
>
> it's not just covad. they're just such an egregious case among
> many socially and technically irresponsible polluters.
eh, since I singled out covad: (and I feel bad for it now)
what about for COX? what about for UU (doh, thats me...or our tac or
something, I'll look/ask), what about Comcast? and TWTC? ArmStrong?
Of these listed 4 are cable companies, is there something in the cable
modem networking that requires deaggregated routes beyond their borders?
Is the problem that they might have seperate 'networks' for their regional
parts and leak more specifics for these parts along with 'backup' routes
via aggregates?
-Chris
