William Herrin wrote:

On Dec 27, 2007 1:59 PM, Jeroen Massar <jeroen@unfix.org> wrote:

...

...

-Do not assign from PoP aggregates

What do you mean with the above? If I understand the line correctly, then I disagree with it.

Jeroen,

If I remember right, this came from a discussion on the ARIN PPML list. I don't clearly remember the discussion, so my apologies in advance if I get some of it wrong.

During discussion and analysis, allocation of addresses by POP was found to be incompatible with a couple goals deemed more important. The general consensus was that you should establish areas consisting of multiple POPs and aggregate by area instead.

Area/PoP, that is a just a way to describe a route into a certain direction. I guess the wording should be changed to resolve the issue I have with it, eg "try to aggregate per area/PoP where possible to keep IGP routes low"

However, ARIN is not in the business of recommending routing best practices so the recommendation was narrowed to just "don't aggregate by POP" meaning "don't fine-tune your aggregation all the way down to the POP level; stop somewhere above it."

Then put that in there, sounds more logical than the "Don't aggregate" line that is in there now. As for the rest of your mail, I would suggest putting it in the Wiki as an explanation and referencing it from the above point as it clarifies a number of things that people will not have to time to go lookup in the mailinglists. Greets, Jeroen