North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Sprint violations (setting space aside for slow-start allocations)
Nick - Good points. You also join the registries in making one of the two very persuasive arguments in favour of relaxing (perhaps some, perhaps all) of 22.214.171.124/8 by one bit, to allow in /19s. Slow-start is a good idea, and we have the RIPE /19 legacy to prove it. Now we need to look at whether this can be done with /18s without exhausting IPv4 too soon, as there are some real concerns about doubling the maximum number of prefixes many routers will see. I also see no problem about working out case-by-case arrangements for putting holes into our filters in the future, taking everybody's various costs into consideration. | If Sprint is not doing a good job of aggregating its announcements, | filter them, eventually they'll get around to aggregating everything | they can. There certainly is some aggregation that should be done downstream from Sprint. We try to encourage people to aggregate what they can aggregate, but some outside pressure to do so probably would help... Sean. P.S.: | So how about agreeing on pools of address space for small allocations? I think you found a good topic!