Actually - as of this week I mailed it automatically to nanog@merit.edu, eof-list@ripe.net, apops@apnic.net However, for some reason I dont see the nanog message. not sure why. This is partly a test to see if I see this one. --Tony Tony Barber <tonyb@uunet.pipex.com> writes: * Tony Bates wrote: * > * > * >This is a list of the "Top 50" players who if CIDRizing at the AS level * >could make a significant gain in the reduction of the size of Internet * >routing tables. This may be an over-estimation but it is hoped that * >this can act as an incentive for the "Top 50" and others to look at * >their CIDR capability. This is a revival of report that used to be * >posted in the early days of CIDR deployment (we even had a cidrd list * >and working group then). * > * >This looks purely at the classful routes in the system and shows what gain * if * >cidrizing at the AS-level could be made by forming an aggregate. * > * > --Tony * > * >P.S. Same caveat about AS name mappings not working quite right yet. * >P.P.S. Unless there are loud objections I plan to automate this again soon * . * > * * The above is an excellent idea. Perhaps if you could mail the output to * nanog and ripe-list the peer pressure would help and in some cases inform * LIRS/ISPs what they may unknowingly be doing wrong. * RIPE did this earlier inthe year for the European registries and it worked. * * Is there an APNIC equivelant ? * * It would also be a good idea IMHO if the Global registries (APNIC RIPE INTE * RNIC)had email lists, alongthe lines of the ones RIPE runs, which it encour * aged * new 'customers' to join. This may be the nearest we get to a global * isp email list. * * Regards * * Tony