Not really. If you split the block into an AUP compatible group and a non-AUP compatible group, then you send in 2 routes in some cases instead of one. Thus you still save a large amount of route table space.
Sigh. I know, and this is what we're planning on doing. However, we were talking about proxy aggregation without consent and Tony complained it would break policy setting Paul (and Tony Li and Vince and ... ) off. With this solution, you'll still run into the problem that Tony was concerned with (or what I thought Tony was concerned with). This seems obvious to me: if you want to CIDRize the world (whether they want to or not), policy based routing on network numbers breaks - I just think people should admit it and deal with it. Also see my response to Bill. Hoping for the day rules will be made so it is easier to be honest than to lie, -drc CIDR - deal with it