[82261] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: EP.NET 198.32.0.0/16 assignments and bogon filters
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com)
Mon Jul 11 00:22:10 2005
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 04:21:38 +0000
From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
To: Joe Abley <jabley@isc.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <2a5b27a5718dbf18f836524d38a3892b@isc.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Sun, Jul 10, 2005 at 09:56:38PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
>
> Since I've just run into the second of these in as many weeks, I
> thought this was perhaps worth a mail to the list.
>
> Many ISPs have import policies which reject exchange point blocks from
> external peers, for which there are many fine and logical arguments.
> Several of those ISPs reject "198.32.0.0/16 le 24" as part of that
> policy, however, believing that 198.32.0.0/16 is only used for exchange
> point assignments.
thank you joe.
since trying to dictate transit policy is bad, i've
only ever told people about peering... this statement
may help. Note that the use of a proxy-aggregate to
filter is just as bad or worse than a proxy-aggregate to
announce.
http://www.ep.net/policy.html
Our statement regarding the injection of EP.NET address space into a routing system.
"anyone who has a properly delegated /32 address delegated/assigned from a /24 within 198.32.0.0/16 may announce that /24 to their peers. This is also true in IPv6 space in that anyone with a properly delegated /64 assigned from a /48 in the 2001:0478::/32 space may annouce that /48 to their peers. Prefix aggregates are discouraged and as a general rule may be considered to be proxy aggregations made by parties who are not direct participants in any address assignments from these ranges."
--bill
