[77899] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: The Cidr Report
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John van Oppen)
Mon Feb 14 04:30:25 2005
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 01:29:05 -0800
From: "John van Oppen" <john@vanoppen.com>
To: "Nanog" <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Hank and Warren are right on. I have seen several ISPs (one of which =
has been around a long time) who don't even understand the basics of =
CIDR routing or why they should aggregate their announcements. This =
same group are the ones who are not subscribed to this mailing list and =
don't go to Nanog events, and there are surly a large number of them.
I think one thing the CIDR report glosses over, with its ranking system =
is the sheer number of ASes which announce extra routes. At least that =
is what strikes me when I start punching my local peer (not customer) =
ASes into the cidr-report website, virtually all of them have an =
aggregation problem and by percentage of junk announcements, the small =
ASes are often far worse than the big guys.
That being said, perhaps we need some sort of nanog outreach or BGP =
support community that larger (or clue full) providers can point their =
less clue full BGP customers towards. The question then becomes, who =
would maintain such a group and how do we get the large number of =
currently non-participating ASes involved?
John van Oppen
PocketiNet Communications
AS23265 (which yes, is fully aggregated)
-----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Hank Nussbacher [mailto:hank@mail.iucc.ac.il]=20
Gesendet: Monday, February 14, 2005 12:26 AM
An: Philip Smith
Cc: Nanog
Betreff: Re: The Cidr Report
At 10:27 AM 14-02-05 +1000, Philip Smith wrote:
Well said. At NANOG you get the clueful people cuz they at least knew =
to=20
come. That is a start. But there are hundreds of ISPs out there who =
don't=20
have a clue. RIPE realized this without having to do a membership poll =
and=20
rightly so, goes and does training where it is needed (and believe me - =
I=20
am their biggest critic and all-around pain in the ass when it comes to=20
their expenses as Leo and Rob can attest).
NANOG is not the place to do it. ARIN, as part of their overhead should =
do=20
an east coast, west coast and Chicago area tutorial at least once a=20
year. And guess what - most of the training material has already been=20
written by the other RIRs.
-Hank
>The BGP tutorials I've been doing on Sundays at NANOG all cover=20
>aggregation - at least, I seem to end up talking about aggregation in =
each=20
>one. Maybe I need to be more direct? But then again, who am I preaching =
>to? The choir maybe, I don't know. Maybe we need a specific aggregation =
>tutorial for those who don't know how to? Those who have operational =
and=20
>technical reasons not to aggregate have made that decision with prior=20
>knowledge. We should try and give everyone else the knowledge, then at=20
>least we will know that all de-aggregation is done for a reason.
>
>Then it begs the question, is NANOG the conference actually reaching =
the=20
>people who'd most benefit from it? I say this as I'm in transit in=20
>Singapore heading back from a hugely successful and enjoyable SANOG =
(South=20
>Asia NOG) in Bangladesh. Similar idea to NANOG, but heavier emphasis on =
>education (workshops & tutorials), and we had ISPs falling over =
themselves=20
>to participate in the first Internet operations meeting held in that =
country.
>
>philip
>--
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>This Mail Was Scanned By Mail-seCure System
>at the Tel-Aviv University CC.
