RE: /24s run amuck

["Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve () telecomplete co uk>]

> 1. If filtering is used, as suggested by someone, what happens to the 
>       small/mid-sized company that is multi-homed out of an ISP's
>       /20 or larger block?  In this case, I can see an ISP with a /20
>       bust that up to /21s smaller to accommodate this user.
> 2. Wasn't /24 filtering something that a few large ISP's did a few
>       years ago and everyone complained? I don't have a reference here
>       but I seem to remember some flack about that.

Both of these points are why filtering is not a good solution, you just dont 
know what those netblocks are that you are missing, it needs to be controlled by 
the ISPs themselves.

> 3. What happens in the case of a carrier that has given /24s to a 
>       downstream out of different blocks?

This is not imho unnecessary deaggregation and not a problem, however where 
possible the blocks should be contiguous and aggregatable (unlikely), and dont 
forget each block should be given on the basis that it will last the downstream 
quite a long time so that over a few years the downstream only accumulates a 
couple blocks anyhow.

> I guess the real question is this:
>
> If X company can not be reached, how/who would you complain to?

If you are company X then its your fault and you should see where you went 
wrong! If you have a /26 that you're trying to route but no one is accepting it 
then consider that maybe you arent justifying your being an ISP..

> And would this be like the RR and AOL email filtering lists where
> we all complain, and this filtering is an effort by some 
> to force others to clean up their act?

Yeah kinda, same but different.. :)

Steve

> Am I out in Left field?
>
> Jim