*** Resending note of 03/18/96 12:43 Folks, May I inject some list-relevant discussion to this cat-fight?
Fortunately, MCI was able to reconfigure our access lists at their router to allow us to broadcast competing more specific routes for each individual class C in the CIDR block. Thus (more or less) restoring IGC's net connectivity.
More specifics aren't competing. They take precedence. Sometimes it's better to be silent and thought dumb...
I don't care to choose sides in this dispute. But as a consequence of this dispute, the size of the standard default-free route tables has grown as a result of the IGC/MCI de-aggregation of routes. This is a bad thing, right? Looking at IBM/Advantis's router at MAE-East, for example, I see 205.198/16 from (AS3830), 205.198.244/22 from (AS3561 AS5799), and 205.198.244/24 from (AS3561 AS5799). AS3830 == Net99, AS3561 == MCI, and AS5799 == IGC. Seems like the rest of the Internet is the long-term victim here... -- Richard Woundy, (not speaking for) IBM