From: Dennis Ferguson <dennis@ans.net> Subject: Re: CIDR deployment Erik-Jan,
NET ASN REGIONAL COUNTRY RESULT ------------ -------- -------------------- ------------- --------- 133.11.0.0 AS372(?) NSN-AMES-AS(?) Japan Unreach 128.250.0.0 AS372(?) NSN-AMES-AS(?) Australia Unreach
This is not actually NSI's problem, it is caused by the fact that the NSFnet has not been configured to accept 192.87.111/22 and hence is not carrying it. The confusing part is that connectivity through there to most places still works because the NSFnet has a default route pointing at Washington2.Dante.net, which runs without route filters. What this breaks, however, is that since NASA doesn't default to anyone they won't be able to reach anything which isn't explicitly announced to them, but we don't have the route to send to them. Dennis, could you comment about the state of the registries? For the past week, BARRnet has been attempting to get our CIDR blocks into the registries, BARRnet says they are advertising our networks to ANS, but I don't see the route on the other side at the ICM. At the current state of the art, then, you really need to have the aggregate configured into the NSFnet database before this will work well. We should also consider pulling the default route from the backbone, it is in principle no longer needed and causes no end of confusion about where the problems are occurring. In principle, I agree with you 100%, however, I'd like some assurances that the Merit registries aren't completely AFU since some folks have already done their withdrawls, and if you've got a problem inside ANS, they default route may be their only saving grace. On the other side, I do agree with you that if there is a NSF/Merit/ANS problem, we need to be able to discover where the problem lies with existing network tools. Would someone in NSI care to coment about routing? Are you folks carrying a default to your FIX-W router or what?