> i.e. is there a pingable address in each, as has been
> discussed here just a few times?
ping is ok, but routing table entry existence seems better. ping can
fail for lots of reasons and what we're really testing is routing, not
icmp end-to-end, right?
There's a difference between reachability
and routability. The lack of a routing table entry
indicates a different problem which implicates routing and
reachability problems. I don't agree that reachability is
implied with routability.
if it's useful, i'd be happy to report what percentage of my peers
have/don't have routes to these prefixes.
I'd be interested.