Canadian routes with BGP no-export communities

Curtis, Sean,

Since these networks presumable are being announced
as more specific by customers of fONOROLA/,
wouldn't it be best to try and get someone who has
an interest in making it work right to do the work,
stead of kicking the backbone provider?

Since the prefix originator is the one who's routing
is breaking, and if they can just register in the RADB to
fix things, I don't really see a problem.

Personally, I'd like to see this type of aggregation
working more often. This seems to be the best way
to get reasonable aggregation out of the "SWAMP" and the
rest of the ~20,000 legacy addresses. This combined with
prefix length filtering, to help "encourage" people to get
address space from their providers, will greatly reduce
the total number of prefixes in the IPv4, "end state"
routing table. (I suspect, but don't have data to prove (YET),
that the best we will be able to do with the ~20,000 is reduce it
to ~10k to ~15k.).

If your routers can hold then hold about 100,000 prefixes
at ~4 paths per prefix, you should be pretty well off for the
next year or so.

I personally think that allowing /19s in 208-223 is a little too
generous with router ram. (And there is the issue of what
happens to 64k Cisco SSP's when forwarding tables exceed 64k)...

Of course if you are using a different routing vendor, you
will see slightly different resource limits.