In return, would Covad please consider performing some meaningful form of route aggregation or other measures to reduce the amount of noise that is being passed across the global routing tables that originates from Covad?
http://www.cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/as-report?as=AS18566&view=4637
suggests that Covad could withdraw some 483 BGP routing table entries, reducing the total number of entires originated by Covad from 490 to an equivalent set of 8 aggregate routes.
perhaps this is not the time/place to raise the point, but I'm coming to the conclusion that there is increasing pushback to -NOT- announce space that is not in active use. So-called "dark" space, i.e. the unused interstitial gaps in delegated space that is the the product of sparse delegation techniques, is perhaps more of a hazzard, esp. wrt. spam/traffic generation than might have been considered in the past. think forged source addresses... if this is a rational line of argument, then two tactics present themselves: 1) announce the individual, more specifics. this has the effect of further bloating the routing table, incuring the rath of the self-appointed routing table police (so watch out Covad, don't do what Telstra did... :) 2) keep my number of routing table entries consistant by "grooming" back my sparse delegations into more homogenous groups, e.g. renumber folks in the four /28s spread across the /19 into a single /26 - then withdraw the /19 and announce the /26 in its place. the number of routing table entries remains consistant and the number of possible entries for forged source addresses is dramatically reduced. Of course this will require a major rethink/ rewrite of most ISPs engineering practice/operating procedures, as it will be much more common to see legitimate, long prefixs in the routing system. as usual, YMMV. --bill