Re: 204.82.160.0/22 invisible

[Sean Doran <smd () icp net>]

Ed - 

  Excellent.  Thank-you.

        Sean.
- --
| From ejk () nitrous digex net Mon Sep 25 01:41:25 1995
| From: Ed Kern <ejk () nitrous digex net>
| To:   asp () uunet uu net (Andrew Partan)
| Cc:   kai () belcom net (Kai), dorian () CIC Net, avg () sprintlink net, baldwin () SDD COMSAT COM, bertolini () 
computel com, concaj () belcom net, donagm () belcom net,
|       ilya () phri nyu edu, insc () sprintlink net, ken () belcom net, khalfk () belcom net, ladycom () computel com, 
nanog () MERIT EDU, noc () digex net, smd () sprint net,
|       susan.evans () SPRINT SPRINT COM
| Subject: Re: 204.82.160.0/22 invisible
|
|
| Some additions
|
|
| On September 25, you wrote:
| > Poking at this futher, Sprint is announcing 204.82.160/22; Digex is
| > behind ANS; this route is not in the RADB; and since ANS insists on all
| > routes being in the RADB, they are not accepting it, so Digex is not
| > seeing it.
|
| Ive statically nailed up this route to sprintlink, for the week of
| this event.  It will be removed either when the week is up, or as soon
| as sprintlink/sean requests its removal.
|
|
| 206.82.160/22 for the record. 
| >
| > Fix: Either get ANS to not insist on all routes being in the RADB or
| > submit an update to the RADB & wait for ANS to regenerate their
| > configs.
|
| While the RADB is flawed (overloaded to the tune of about 30k routes
| and not including routes such as this one) I dont think ans is quite
| ready to hang it up...
|
| so those of us who rely on the RADB, or (in my case) rely on transit
| provider based on the radb, we'll have to take these one at a time.
|
|
| Hopefully without the "anti-trust, im going to sue you, guess I have
| to be the martyr" bullshit.
|
| > 
| > Kai: Please don't widly accuse folks before poking into the facts.
| >     --asp () uunet uu net (Andrew Partan)
|
|
| and as to this
|
| >> Correct. I have other networks in 204, so above was a typo. Also correct:
| >> he (rather cryptically) said Sprint wouldn't filter outgoing (hence
| >> customer-owned) routes, but he encouraged OTHER providers to do it like
| >> Sprint: filter incoming routes by the rules anounced: this has the same
| >> effect, but now Sean could point at Digex (should they employ such a
| >> filter) "I didn't do it, man!"...
|
| Ill have you know that the filter list im working on looks nothing like
| the sprintlink one in any way..least not after I took those ugly comments
| out ;)
|
| Ed
|
|