Re: UUNet Routing SNAFU

[miquels () cistron nl (Miquel van Smoorenburg)]

In article <Pine.GSO.3.96.971008141916.316n-100000 () thorn blackrose org>,
Dorian R. Kim <dorian () blackrose org> wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Oct 1997, Steve Meuse wrote:
>
> > At 09:11 AM 10/8/97 -0700, Michael Dillon wrote:
> > > I understand that it is not to everyone's benefit to filter on the /19
> > > boundary like Sprint does but it seems to be prudent to adopt a /8 filter
> > > on most of the old class A space and a /16 filter on the old class B space.
> > > Other than the need to update these filters as the former class A space is
> > > subdivided I can see no major downside.
> > >
> > > Comments?
> >
> > What about the cable providers that have chunks of 24/8?
>
> 62/8, 63/8 and 64/8 are being assigned now.

Not quite, part or all 62/8 is being assigned by RIPE NCC in Europe, and
they don't give out smaller netblocks than /19's. We have 62.216/19
for example. The not smaller than /19 is common policy of RIPE btw.

Mike.
-- 
   Miquel van      | Cistron Internet Services   --    Alphen aan den Rijn.
   Smoorenburg,    | mailto:info () cistron nl          http://www.cistron.nl/
miquels () cistron nl | Our vision is to speed up time, eventually eliminating it.