Steve,
Well, the best thing I can think of is 1) we get rid of metric:as lists and 2) we modify our aut-num object on a per-AS basis to clean out exceptions like these routed only via the CIX, so that we route to them via major interchange points (MAE-East, Sprint NAP, MAE-West, Pac Bell NAP, ...). We probably don't want to do this until we axe the metric:as lists (so that we just do it once, on an AS-basis).
OK. So my understanding then is that existing PRDB objects can be left alone, that new NACRS until 8 May still have to include "aslist:" fields, and that ANS wants new RR objects after 8 May to include "advisory: AS690" fields, but that ANS will soon stop wanting the advisory list.
Some non-NSFnet aggregates contain more-specific routes that do (or rather, did) have NSFNet routing. How soon can we withdraw the more-specifics? I fear that bad things will happen if we withdraw the more-specifics without first changing the aslist on the aggregate.
In theory, immediately,
If I withdraw the more-specifics immediately, then ANS will route them via the CIX instead of via better paths. However, if I were to imediately send in a NACR with a better aslist for the aggregate, then I would be able to withdraw the more-specifics without losing anything. Can I do that without having to promise to obey anybody's idea of a network AUP? I seem to have a three-way choice between doing nothing until ANS sorts out its configuration to no longer need aslists (in which case global routing tables are burdened by my more-specific routes for a while longer than they have already been burdened), withdrawing my more-specifics immediately (in which case they get worse routing from ANS than they had been getting), or sending in NACRs to change things (which involves extra work for a lot of people). I expect that my situation is not unique. I also want to echo Sean Doran's question of what text to put at the top of any NACR submitted before 8 May. It's not just the text at the top that presents a problem; even the "%begin nsfnet nacr v7.1" or "%begin ansnet nacr v2.0" no longer seems particularly apppropriate, and what do we put in the "aup:" line? --apb (Alan Barrett)