Michael Dillon wrote:
Sorry, I should have clarified. It's something I haulled off of an ISP
discussion list and it appears that some of RIPE's activities may be
butting heads with Sprint's route filtering policies. Specifically, RIPE
is charging a fee to ISP's to get large blocks of IP addresses to allocate
to their customers and yet these blocks are smaller than what Sprint will
route.
Specifically RIPE are allocating /19s as their default allocation window
to local-IRs. They don't charge per block but they charge a yearly fee
for being a local-IR. Sprint in its wisdom is filtering those in 195/8
(great theory, but a bit problematic in practice when it can't agree with
one of the larger registries on what size to filter) with the result
there are now likely to be 50% more adverts (i.e. 2x/19 and an additional
/18 - /19 still necessary to get ANS to work as you can't put a /18
route object in the database).
I was kind of hoping that someone would pipe up and say that the
operations folks and the IP registres are now working closer and
coordinating their activities. Am I dreaming?....
AFAIK Yes. But it would be great if not (I wasn't at NANOG so missed
the announcement).
Alex Bligh
Xara Networks