[snip]
> ASnum NetsNow NetsAggr NetGain % Gain Description
>
> AS18566 751 6 745 99.2% CVAD Covad
Communications
[snip]
not to justify the expense, but perhaps covad is renumbering from one
block to another? Looking at their advertisments I see lots of /23 or
/24
blocks inside their larger covering routes... So either they
deaggregated
to renumber more gracefully, or they forgot their prefix-list outbound
to
williams and exodus ?
perhaps covad can explain? or silently cover up the 'mistake' (which
is
acceptable as well...)
I've been secretly hoping no one would notice Covad's ascension to the
number one spot (which we've held for well over a month now ;). I
actually made it through the last NANOG without a single mention of
Covad's route bloat!
There are no mistakes or excuses here. And there's definitely no
renumbering going on.
We were actually fully aggregated until an unfortunate incident this
past May involving a distant service provider leaking our specifics.
Gigs of traffic somehow vanished into Eastern Europe. The net result was
deaggregation.
It's unlikely we will aggregate down to less than 10 netblocks again.
However, we do make every effort to aggregate where possible.
Our superblocks are also being advertised, for those of you that want to
filter our routes.
Want to discuss further? Great. Call me or email me directly. Contact
info is below.
Think you can do it better? Even better. It turns out I'm hiring. 
Regards,
Brad
geoff,
your proggy already knows what filter list(s) would keep us
from carrying the polluters' rubbish. any chance you could
generate the filter code for juniper, procket, and cisco so
automated router builds could fetch it with batch wget or ncftp
or whatever?
another cutie would be if whovever is maintaining peval this
week could add an option to not deliver covered prefixes from
the same origin?
no slur intended on any particular polluter. but i think what
we have here is the strafing of the commons. enough is enough.
randy
thanks brad atleast some answer was provided.
Interestingly enough what Covad appears to be saying is:
If we had a way to announce two things
1 - here are the advertisements for covering aggregates for Covad
AND
2 - do not believe any more specifics for these address blocks, as they are NOT part of Covad's routing policy for these prefixes
then we would not be seeing this unfortunate case of unauthorized route leakage being resolved in a way that seems to have unfortunate bgp implications in terms of more specifics appearing.
So its an interesting question. How could Covad achieve a routing policy announcement of the form as stated in 2 above?
regards,
Geoff
Interestingly enough what Covad appears to be saying is:
If we had a way to announce two things
1 - here are the advertisements for covering aggregates for Covad
AND
2 - do not believe any more specifics for these address blocks, as they are
NOT part of Covad's routing policy for these prefixes
then we would not be seeing this unfortunate case of unauthorized route
leakage being resolved in a way that seems to have unfortunate bgp
implications in terms of more specifics appearing.
So its an interesting question. How could Covad achieve a routing policy
announcement of the form as stated in 2 above?
register the covering prefixes in the irr and folk should filter.
folk who don't filter are welcome to the results. i encourage my
competitors not to filter.
randy
it won't be your competitors who suffer though...it would be the networks
that someone is trying to hijack that would see traffic/reachability
problems. granted this would be limited in scope to those networks which
are not filtering, but as we have seen numberous times on this list and
others, filtering isn't universal or equally applied.
while i don't agree with the methodology covad is using, i can understand
their position. and if it had happened to me, i probably would have done
the same, albeit for a shorter time frame...you and i are free to filter
our networks as we see fit (or are contractually obligated), so if you
want to filter at /18, go for it. i however will urge everyone
(especially my competitors) to filter because it is good for them and good
for me.
/joshua