nanog mailing list archives
Re: filtering long prefixes
From: kai () netcom com (Kai)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 20:24:11 -0700
As my company (belcom.net) as gotten the 206.82.160.0/22 network assignment as recently as _10_ days ago (from the Internic, after endless fights against the small brains that wouldn't want to see the usefulness of route aggregation; and yes: it's routed by Sprint), isn't the Internic committing some terrible crime against the public , err: network , here ? Now, would someone please explain in no more than 5-10 lines why the old class-A and class-B space is NOT hacked into smaller than /8 and /16 assignments, or at least shouldn't ? bye,Kai --- Kai Schlichting Internet Project Manager, BelCom, Inc. 515 Madison Ave Suite 2100 NY,NY 10022 212-705-9500 (voice) 212-755-0864 (fax) kai () belcom net
Current thread:
- Re: filtering long prefixes, (continued)
- Re: filtering long prefixes John Bradley (Sep 21)
- Re: filtering long prefixes Sean Doran (Sep 21)
- Re: filtering long prefixes Sean Doran (Sep 21)
- Re: filtering long prefixes Willi Huber (Sep 26)
- Re: filtering long prefixes Sean Doran (Sep 21)
- filtering long prefixes Mark Kent (Sep 21)
- Re: filtering long prefixes Dave Siegel (Sep 22)
- filtering long prefixes Mark Kent (Sep 21)
- Re: filtering long prefixes Sean Doran (Sep 21)
- Re: filtering long prefixes Michael Dillon (Sep 21)
- Re: filtering long prefixes bmanning (Sep 24)
- Re: filtering long prefixes Michael Dillon (Sep 21)
- Re: filtering long prefixes Kai (Sep 21)
- Re: filtering long prefixes Noel Chiappa (Sep 22)
- Re: filtering long prefixes Dave Siegel (Sep 22)
- Re: filtering long prefixes Guy Middleton (Sep 25)