Re: More route-table bloat vs. ARIN micro-allocations

["John M. Brown" <jmbrown () ihighway net>]

Yes, 3561 is one of our transit.  This isn't about what filters we have
or don't have.  its about the fact that from my view there are some announcements
that really shouldn't be on the net in the first place.  

Some providers (some of our other transits) provide a cleaner table.

Personally it seems many BGP folks are lazy and don't keep things clean....

I thought patrick got enabled?  I know if I keep this up, I will loose it :)


On Fri, Feb 18, 2000 at 11:58:44PM -0800, Steve Rubin wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 19, 2000 at 12:37:32AM -0700, John M. Brown wrote:
> > so I decided to poke around some more...
> >
> > I really can't see how the argument of ""Route / AS-Path" table bloat
> > is going to break things if ARIN starts doing mico-allocations for
> > providers that need to multi-home, but don't need tons of space.
> >
> > I really like the /30's, /32's...   
>
> [routes deleted]
>
> I take it you get transit from the network formerly known as iMCI as from what 
> I can tell, it looks like they don't send these routes to peers.  I'd be 
> willing to bet this is a knob they can turn off for you if you don't want to
> see the routes... Or you can just install some sanity filtering on your 
> inbound peers/transit providers to nuke the /25 and up's.
>
> Then again, like Patrick, I have no enable, so what do I know? :-)
>
> -- 
> Steve Rubin * ser () tch org * http://www.tch.org/~ser/