nanog mailing list archives
Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP?
From: William Herrin <bill () herrin us>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2023 08:56:03 -0800
On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 11:06 PM Masataka Ohta <mohta () necom830 hpcl titech ac jp> wrote:
William Herrin wrote: > Moreover, the DNS does guarantee > its information to be correct until the TTL expires, making it > unsuitable for communicating address information which may change > sooner. I'm afraid you know very little about DNS operation.
How do you expect to improve your draft if you don't listen when people tell you you've screwed something up? -Bill Herrin -- For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/
Current thread:
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP?, (continued)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? Forrest Christian (List Account) (Jan 24)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? Lars Prehn (Jan 25)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? Masataka Ohta (Jan 27)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? William Herrin (Jan 28)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? Donald Eastlake (Jan 28)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? William Herrin (Jan 28)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? William Herrin (Jan 28)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? Masataka Ohta (Jan 28)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? William Herrin (Jan 28)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? Masataka Ohta (Jan 28)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? William Herrin (Jan 29)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? Masataka Ohta (Jan 28)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? Masataka Ohta (Jan 29)
- ROV concern for hyper-specific prefixes (renamed from `Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP?') Amir Herzberg (Jan 30)
- Re: ROV concern for hyper-specific prefixes (renamed from `Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP?') Tom Beecher (Jan 30)
- Re: ROV concern for hyper-specific prefixes (renamed from `Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP?') Amir Herzberg (Jan 30)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? Eric Kuhnke (Jan 25)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? Jon Lewis (Jan 25)
- Re: Smaller than a /24 for BGP? Mike Hammett (Jan 26)