At 10:50 AM 2/25/97 -0500, Paul Ferguson wrote:
Well, without naming names, the prefix-length based filtering is done on non-customer routes. A byproduct of this is it grudgingly encourages aggregation.
Well, yes, but now that multiple providers are doing this the fact that they are non-customer filters affects anyone who is not a customer of BOTH providers, thus further encouraging people to aggregate. I would not mind seeing these filters become more prevalent, making it unreasonable for people to become customers of everyone who filters to get around the filters. Renumbering is NOT that hard folks, and it DOES help.
Justin Newton Network Architect Erol's Internet Services ISP/C Director at Large
Renumbering is not that hard IF you are an end-user and it only affects one or two links (ie: a /24 or two). It is atrociously difficult if you're an ISP and have sold sizeable connections to end-users, some of them with significant installed base (ie: a school system with a dozen buildings across a metro area and a thousand or more systems, along with the infrastructure to interconnect them). It also will disrupt service if you're serving web pages or doing other things that require stable IP numbers. In general I agree that renumbering in the general case for end customers isn't that big a deal. However, for ISPs there are significant legal and operational issues raised by being forced to renumber due to a change in provider relationships. Actions which operational groups such as NANOG take that cause those hardships are, in my opinion, dangerous on a business level. -- -- Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service | 99 Analog numbers, 77 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| Email to "info@mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/ Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal