invisible (fwd)

Sean Doran wrote:

Thank-you Andrew. That matches my diagnosis.

Kai: computel, our customer, should be able to help you
prepare an entry for the RADB; failing that, please
feel free to turn to noc@ans.net or engineer@sprint.net
for assistance in updating the RADB so that your prefix
is heard by ANS.

See, ANS has an inbound route-filter too... and it's MUCH older than Sprint's.

- --
Sean Doran <smd@sprint.net>
- --

In lieu of Computel knowing what the RADB is, I will handle the RADB entry
myself, if I don't decide to recycle the assignment altogether and start
from scratch, which is likely by now, after analyzing and evaluating the
situation a bit more. The Internic should strap on more asbestos now.
Is it preferable for Sprint to announce/act under my (future) ASN rather
than take the route into one of their own ASNs ? Computel is kinda a like
dark tunnel between us at this time...

THANKS to all for the response and fix for now.

Kai "don't filter my route" Schlichting

ps: some NANOG readers wrote back that my route is looping overseas: yes,
there is some trouble this hour...the evil of default routes.

Just out of curiosity, why should Internic strap on more asbestos?

I thought the following would have been warning enough:


Due to technical and implementation constraints on the Internet routing
system and the possibility of routing overload, certain policies may
need to be enforced by the major transit providers in order to reduce
the number of globally advertised routes. These potential policies
may include setting limits on the size of CIDR prefixes added to the
routing tables, filtering of non-aggregated routes, etc. Therefore,
addresses obtained directly from the InterNIC (non-provider-based,
also known as portable) are not guaranteed to be routable on the Internet.