nanog mailing list archives
Re: The SWAMP
From: jon () branch com (Jon Zeeff)
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 09:19:15 -0400 (EDT)
I believe, in a limited case like this, the scarce resource is all the time it takes many people to put in an exception for this and the additional unreliability that exceptions cause. A few extra routes or a few extra addresses are insignificant.
If there has to be a separate route for each one anyway, why not just blow 253*10 addresses and announce a /24 for each root name server, even if only one IP out of each /24 is used? Less CPU to blow holes in filters that normally deny > /24. AviHow far does this get extended, then? What if, to encourage aggregation, /24s start to be filtered? Do you then blow a /23? A /22? I guess the real question is how do you balance between two scarce resources, router CPU and IPv4 address space. -BD
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: The SWAMP, (continued)
- Re: The SWAMP Bill Manning (Sep 09)
- Re: The SWAMP Paul A Vixie (Sep 09)
- Re: The SWAMP Randy Bush (Sep 09)
- Work Work Work Bill Manning (Sep 09)
- Re: Work Work Work Randy Bush (Sep 09)
- Re: Work Work Work Jon Zeeff (Sep 09)
- Re: The SWAMP Paul A Vixie (Sep 08)
- Re: The SWAMP Jon Zeeff (Sep 09)
- Re: Root Nameserver IPs Zachary DeAquila (Sep 09)
- Re: The SWAMP Eric Ziegast (Sep 09)
- Re: The SWAMP Perry E. Metzger (Sep 09)
- Re: The SWAMP Mathias Koerber (Sep 09)
- Re: The SWAMP Eric Ziegast (Sep 10)