At 11:29 PM 6/20/99 +0200, Philippe Strauss wrote:
On Fri, Jun 18, 1999 at 12:55:16AM -0700, I Am Not An Isp wrote:
I am sorry, I never intended that page to be USED by anyone, it was strictly there for historical/reference purposes.
Yes, I've used it because it was the only version of Sean's ACL112 I've found. My goal was just to experiment about how isp's desaggregate ip space relative to how assigning authorities distribute it.
Funny, I wonder why you didn't get the original NANOG post - the URL to which I copied in my last post.
Philippe, if you are going to use something like a modern ACL112, please check out Sean's later posts in the NANOG archive.
OK, thanks for the advice. Will look the archive.
Actually, I did a brief perusal of the archives on www.nanog.org and didn't find the final version. Does anyone have a copy I can post on the web site?
But for production, I stick to your ACL190.
Thanx, but there is a minor error in that one too. :) Don't use the 192.0.0.0/8 line. (Not that it should hurt anything, but don't use it anyway.) I'll be putting up a better one in a little while.
Anyone having references about how assigning authorities claim to aggregate address space? (I know that RIPE never allocater longer than /20 in 195.0.0.0/8) ACL112 take various assumption, were are the reference information about that?
If you go to the URL I copied in my last post and look at the threads surrounding it, Sean's logic is partially exposed in posts to this very list - as well as other peoples' reactions to his logic. (Please note that I am in no way claiming to know why Sean did something, just pointing out that he posted some reasons to NANOG that might clarify his reasoning.)
Altavista found it for me :-) Try ACL112 and look the result. Time to write a robot.txt :-))
Heh. Those damned robots. :)
Philippe Strauss, ingenieur reseau/systemes, Urbanet SA
TTFN, patrick -- I Am Not An Isp - www.ianai.net ISPF, The Forum for ISPs by ISPs, <http://www.ispf.com> "Think of it as evolution in action." - Niven & Pournelle (No, I still don't have enable. ;-)