[99035] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: An informal survey... round II
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joel Jaeggli)
Thu Aug 30 12:24:40 2007
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 09:16:24 -0700
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
To: William Herrin <herrin-nanog@dirtside.com>
CC: John Curran <jcurran@mail.com>, nanog list <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <3c3e3fca0708300612y5e236392y6b954ee03947087f@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
William Herrin wrote:
> On 8/30/07, John Curran <jcurran@mail.com> wrote:
>> I.E. If at some time unknown around 2010, ISP's stop receiving
>> new allocations from their RIR, and instead use of many smaller
>> "recycled" IPv4 address blocks, we could be looking at a 10x to
>> 20x increase in routes per month for the same customer growth.
>
> John,
>
> Why should we announce tiny recycled blocks? If there is a /16 in the
> swamp in which half the space is free but its all /24's, why wouldn't
> wouldn't we allocate all the free /24's to a single entity and
> instruct the entity to announce it as a "holey" /16? The existing /24
> holders will override (punch holes in) the /16 for their /24's.
And when they withdraw the more specific or you glop them together in
your fib in the name of agregation a 3rd party gets all their traffic?
I'm sure that will work really well.
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>
>
