The muckslinging here reminds me of the break between
the operators and the IETF -- the users go on and on
about the evil motives of the operators big & small,
and demonstrate their lack of understanding or lack
of social skills in the process enough that operators
decide it's no longer fun to play.
I got a message from an operator people would recognize
that is interesting, useful, and relevant to operations.
Hopefully the good advice in here won't get lost just
because the author in question is on the "filtering side".
"announce ... aggregates [, develop a] sensible policy
[, and acquire] /20's for each location."
Who can argue with that?
Those of you who feel that regional & local ISPs are being persecuted,
please tattoo that advice on your forehead, backwards, so you
can see it reflected in your monitor next time before you
flame on NANOG about how horrible filtering long prefixes is.
My correspondent and his or her colleagues will appreciate
the reduction in stomach acids which are not good for any
engineer's duodenum.
Sean.
PS: Well, it's even better if you never announce the
more specifics in the first place, imho, but...
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 18:29:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: Sean M. Doran <smd@clock.org>
The muckslinging here reminds me of the break between
[ snip ]
I got a message from an operator people would recognize
that is interesting, useful, and relevant to operations.
Hopefully the good advice in here won't get lost just
because the author in question is on the "filtering side".
I get it, now. It's "pro-filtering" and "anti-filtering".
There's no gray area. *sigh*
Sign me up for party #3, selective filtering, in the flamefest
"announce ... aggregates [, develop a] sensible policy
[, and acquire] /20's for each location."
Who can argue with that?
Sounds good to me.
Those of you who feel that regional & local ISPs are being persecuted,
please tattoo that advice on your forehead, backwards, so you
can see it reflected in your monitor next time before you
flame on NANOG about how horrible filtering long prefixes is.
Muckslinging? pot --> kettle --> black
My correspondent and his or her colleagues will appreciate
the reduction in stomach acids which are not good for any
engineer's duodenum.
No kidding.
PS: Well, it's even better if you never announce the
more specifics in the first place, imho, but...
Unless, again, there is no alternative.
> > ps - bad cold, hence in for the night bored
> > - --
> > > if people would just announce their /16's, /20's or aggregates
> > > as well as the specifics it would solve the problem. people don't
> > > understand their allocations then complain to us.
> > >
> > > the obvious case of that is when people get a /20 then
> > > split the /24's into different geographic regions. as long as
> > > they have a sensible policy, the rir will assign them /20's for
> > > each location.
No problem with this. Does this mean multihoming automatically
qualifies one for a /20? If not, we still have a reason to allow
longer than /20.