nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 section of ARIN Number Resource Policy (Sec 6.5.1.1.c)
From: Pekka Savola <pekkas () netcore fi>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 19:05:47 +0200 (EET)
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Nicolás Antoniello wrote:
A /28 prefix may have a lot of incoming traffic associated to it, so I believe the dissagregation (subnets) of the prefix should be allowed by the policy.What do you think? Do you have a similar problem?
Please achieve inbound load balancing on other, less network-stressful, ways. At least one way to do so to examine what can be done to influence your upstreams' (and recursively if applicable) route preferences (e.g., using communities).
-- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
Current thread:
- IPv6 section of ARIN Number Resource Policy (Sec 6.5.1.1.c) Nicolás Antoniello (Jan 17)
- Re: IPv6 section of ARIN Number Resource Policy (Sec 6.5.1.1.c) Pekka Savola (Jan 17)
- Re: IPv6 section of ARIN Number Resource Policy (Sec 6.5.1.1.c) Jeroen Massar (Jan 17)
- Re: IPv6 section of ARIN Number Resource Policy (Sec 6.5.1.1.c) Pekka Savola (Jan 17)