Re: Route table growth and hardware limits...talk to the filter

[bmanning () vacation karoshi com]

On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 10:16:17AM -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> Thus spake "Jon Lewis" <jlewis () lewis org>
> > The trouble is, it turns out there are a number of networks where
> > CIDR isn't spoken.  They get their IP space from their RIR, break
> > it up into /24s, and announce those /24s (the ones they're using
> > anyway) into BGP as /24s with no covering CIDR.
>
> IMHO, such networks are broken and they should be filtered.  If people 
> doing this found themselves unable to reach the significant fraction of the 
> Net (or certain key sites), they would add the covering route even if they 
> were hoping people would accept their incompetent/TE /24s.

        well, your assumptio n about how prefixes are used might be 
        tempered with the thought that some /24s are used for 
        interconnecting ISP's at exchanges...

        and for that matter it seems a lazy ISP to pass the buck 
        on "routability" to an org that runs no transit infrastructure.
        RIR's (Well ARIN anyway) has NEVER assured routability of
        a delegated prefix.  Tracking /filters based on RIR delegation
        policy seems like a leap to me...

--bill

> Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein