nanog mailing list archives
Re: Deaggregating for emergency purposes
From: Richard A Steenbergen <ras () e-gerbil net>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 17:00:46 -0400
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 09:00:55PM -0400, Phil Rosenthal wrote:
But the question is, what do you do if it's coming from somewhere with a difficult to contact NOC, and their upstream is difficult to contact as well?
If you really MUST plan to announce more specifics, I'd suggest you lookup RPSL and the ^ operator (ex: 1.2.3.0/19^+). If done correctly, it should result in no real overhead in IRR or on your providers' routers. Those ge and le operators are there for a reason, use 'em. -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras () e-gerbil net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)
Current thread:
- Re: RFC 2870's applicability (Re: Deaggregating for emergency purposes), (continued)
- Re: RFC 2870's applicability (Re: Deaggregating for emergency purposes) Patrick (Aug 07)
- Re: RFC 2870's applicability (Re: Deaggregating for emergency purposes) Brad Knowles (Aug 09)
- Re: RFC 2870's applicability (Re: Deaggregating for emergency purposes) Stephen Sprunk (Aug 09)
- Re: RFC 2870's applicability (Re: Deaggregating for emergency purposes) Randy Bush (Aug 09)
- Re: RFC 2870's applicability (Re: Deaggregating for emergency purposes) Paul Vixie (Aug 09)
- Re: Deaggregating for emergency purposes Adam Rothschild (Aug 06)
- Re: Deaggregating for emergency purposes Chris Woodfield (Aug 07)
- RE: Deaggregating for emergency purposes Derek Samford (Aug 07)
- Re: Deaggregating for emergency purposes Valdis . Kletnieks (Aug 07)
- RE: Deaggregating for emergency purposes Phil Rosenthal (Aug 07)
- Re: Deaggregating for emergency purposes Richard A Steenbergen (Aug 06)
- Re: Deaggregating for emergency purposes bmanning (Aug 06)
- Re: Deaggregating for emergency purposes bdragon (Aug 06)
- "... I don't think that means what he thinks it means..." bmanning (Aug 07)