nanog mailing list archives
RE: Any people still with old filters?
From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis () kurtis pp se>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 20:23:25 +0200
...and the clue-less on the Internet is (still) less than 80%. It's more like 20%. See http://mcvax.org/~jhma/routing for one example of how much we could gain if we actually aggregated...This was hinted at in the peering debate, but wouldn't it help the cause of aggregation if networks stopped requiring a large number of prefixes in order to establish peering?
Interesting point. But peering is a commercial relationship. Basing it on number of prefixes is IMO a wierd view, but yes that is done. It CAN be a meassurement, but hopefully people using it as an argument is clever enough to actually look at the routes - not just the numbers of them.
I seriously doubt that this is the real reason for the routes though. Best regards, - kurtis -
Current thread:
- Any people still with old filters? Roy (Jul 27)
- RE: Any people still with old filters? Phil Rosenthal (Jul 27)
- RE: Any people still with old filters? Kurt Erik Lindqvist (Jul 29)
- RE: Any people still with old filters? Ralph Doncaster (Jul 29)
- RE: Any people still with old filters? Kurt Erik Lindqvist (Jul 29)
- RE: Any people still with old filters? Kurt Erik Lindqvist (Jul 29)
- RE: Any people still with old filters? Phil Rosenthal (Jul 27)
- Re: Any people still with old filters? Stephen Griffin (Jul 27)