On Sun, Jul 10, 2005 at 09:56:38PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
Since I've just run into the second of these in as many weeks, I thought this was perhaps worth a mail to the list.
Many ISPs have import policies which reject exchange point blocks from external peers, for which there are many fine and logical arguments. Several of those ISPs reject "198.32.0.0/16 le 24" as part of that policy, however, believing that 198.32.0.0/16 is only used for exchange point assignments.
thank you joe. since trying to dictate transit policy is bad, i've only ever told people about peering... this statement may help. Note that the use of a proxy-aggregate to filter is just as bad or worse than a proxy-aggregate to announce. http://www.ep.net/policy.html Our statement regarding the injection of EP.NET address space into a routing system. "anyone who has a properly delegated /32 address delegated/assigned from a /24 within 198.32.0.0/16 may announce that /24 to their peers. This is also true in IPv6 space in that anyone with a properly delegated /64 assigned from a /48 in the 2001:0478::/32 space may annouce that /48 to their peers. Prefix aggregates are discouraged and as a general rule may be considered to be proxy aggregations made by parties who are not direct participants in any address assignments from these ranges." --bill