over 2500 routes could be removed from the routing table
or make room for 2500 of those long prefixes nobody wants to accept
this is pretty embarrassing for the operator community.
Only when size of table is used as an excuse to not let longer prefixes be used, instead causing more address space to be used to get by those filters. regards brandon
Hi, On Fri, Apr 21, 2000 at 10:26:45PM +0100, BrandonButterworth wrote:
over 2500 routes could be removed from the routing table
or make room for 2500 of those long prefixes nobody wants to accept
Not only this, but we're seeing more and more /32 (!) annoucements.. Here are some, which we see in the table: *>i24.147.212.81/32 193.141.54.100 100 0 517 1755 1 i *>i130.227.8.1/32 193.141.54.100 100 0 517 1755 1257 5492 i *>i130.227.8.3/32 193.141.54.100 100 0 517 1755 1257 5492 i *>i130.227.8.6/32 193.141.54.100 100 0 517 1755 1257 5492 i *>i130.227.8.229/32 193.141.54.100 100 0 517 1755 1257 5492 i We are implementing prefix-length filters now... Greetings, Kurt -- noris network GmbH / Kilianstrasse 142 \ 90425 Nuernberg Tel. (0911) 9352-0 / Fax (0911) 9352-100 \ kurt@noris.net %IDS-4-IP_IMPOSSIBLE_SIG: Sig:1102:Impossible IP Packet
On Tue, Apr 25, 2000 at 01:00:27PM +0200, Kurt Kayser wrote:
Not only this, but we're seeing more and more /32 (!) annoucements.. Here are some, which we see in the table: I saw those recently too in our bgp tables :-( Though I considered to filter prefixes bigger than /24 off, I don't "dare" it by now. The reason is, that our customers lack the reachability to these smaller networks. Any hints or comments ?
cheers Udo -- R-KOM GmbH & Co KG Network Operations Center phone: +49 941 6985-0 fax: +49 941 6985-281
Hi, On Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 01:09:04PM +0200, Udo Steinegger wrote:
On Tue, Apr 25, 2000 at 01:00:27PM +0200, Kurt Kayser wrote:
Not only this, but we're seeing more and more /32 (!) annoucements.. Here are some, which we see in the table: I saw those recently too in our bgp tables :-( Though I considered to filter prefixes bigger than /24 off, I don't "dare" it by now. The reason is, that our customers lack the reachability to these smaller networks. Any hints or comments ?
If someone announces a /32, he doesn't deserve reachability. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- SpaceNet GmbH Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299
Hi, Dans son message (In his/her message), Gert Doering ecrivait (wrote) :
Hi,
On Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 01:09:04PM +0200, Udo Steinegger wrote:
On Tue, Apr 25, 2000 at 01:00:27PM +0200, Kurt Kayser wrote:
If someone announces a /32, he doesn't deserve reachability.
I remember discussion quite a long ago about announcing DNS root name servers as /32... and I don't really think they don't deserve reachability... This was just to make sure that someone making a more specific announce couldn't prevent access to these machines... Regards, Paul Fin du message inclus (end of included message). .--. The penguin Paul Rolland, rol@oleane.net |o_o | will survive, France Telecom Oleane/Direction Technique/Directeur |(_/ | unlike France Telecom Oleane/Technical Direction/Director // \ \ dinosaurs ! (| | ) -- /'\_ _/`\ \___)=(___/ Please no MIME, I don't read it - Pas de MIME, je ne le lis pas Please no HTML, I'm not a navigator - Pas d'HTML, je ne suis pas un navigateur "Unless you try to do something beyond what you've already mastered, you'll never grow"
participants (5)
-
brandon＠rd.bbc.co.uk -
Gert Doering -
Kurt Kayser -
Paul Rolland -
Udo Steinegger