On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 01:34:35PM -0700, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 01:14:14PM -0700, Joe Abley wrote:
It's extremely common for edge networks to pre-arrange a capability to deaggregate in case they ever need to.
Is this the case here?
I can't tell, and neither can you.
Does sending a prefix-list to a public mailing-list count for "pre-arrange"?
Nope. Sending a prefix-list to your transit provider counts as "pre-arrange". What you saw was something similar, but one tier distant from the origin route policy.
If this is indeed the case would it not be better to send
10.0.0.0/21 le 24
as opposed to 24 individual statements? Does this not more clearly indicate this kind of intent?
No.
The argument that deaggregation is bad and wrong because it hurts the core is interesting right up until the point the customer decides to buy service somewhere else because you won't let them multi-home the way they want to.
Is this the case here? Are all of the deaggregated /21s the result of this or even the result of giving better (potential) flow management?
I can't tell, and neither can you.
I really don't know, which in part was the reason for the original question.
Lack of a smiley face does not necessarily imply criticism or a pointed comment :)
Ditto :) Joe - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog