too many routes

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

Michael Dillon writes...

>I would think the latter. If so, would anyone know why it is that the
>backbone providers are so resistant to giving out blocks to do this?

If backbone operators do not efficiently allocate IP space to their
downstream customers then the next time they need additional IP space they
will not be able to get any. Everyone in the food chain has to operate
under the same policies of justifying IP space based on need and using the
space efficiently. There is more info on this at http://www.arin.net and in
particular you should have a look through the recommended reading section
especially any documents relating to CIDR.

It seems that efficiency is measured only in terms of numbers of IP addresses
and disregards numbers of routes.

We are at a point that we can pretty much nearly fill a /19 and will be
past that point by the end of the year. Beyond that, I would think that
when we need to keep coming back for address space, we would do it in
increments of /19.

How much of the routing space is filled with networks smaller than /19 that
are part of an ASN that has enough other smaller networks to renumber into
a single /19.

I'm wondering if the policies are not being counter productive due to the
apparently opposing nature of IP space vs route space (e.g. the one where
people have to take more IP space to be routed, because of route filters,
because of too many routes, because IP space is so fragmented, because IP
space needs to be conserved, because everyone needs to get more IP space,
becayse of route filtering, because of so many routes, because ...).

I was given some other mailing lists for dealing with those issues by someone.
I'll be subscribing there.

In the mean time, especially to help put topics on the correct mailing list
(if on-topic posts are to be another goal) can someone post an informatory
posting that lists ALL the mailing lists (preferrably with a brief summary
of topic/purpose) that would be of interest to ALL the aspects of network
provider business and operation?

Or is this listed on a web page? If not, I'll offer to host just such a
web page if I can get a pretty much complete list (I'll even write HTML to
get it going). But I'm sure most everyone here has some access to some
web space somewhere.

2

We are at a point that we can pretty much nearly fill a /19 and will be
past that point by the end of the year. Beyond that, I would think that
when we need to keep coming back for address space, we would do it in
increments of /19.

The problem is that although you know your goals and you also know that you
WILL reach your goals, there are other companies out there with wildly
inflated goals that will never even come close to reaching them. The
registry folks have to cut through the bullshit and try to avoid delegating
space to companies who don't really need the space and will never use it.

I'm wondering if the policies are not being counter productive due to the
apparently opposing nature of IP space vs route space (e.g. the one where
people have to take more IP space to be routed, because of route filters,
because of too many routes, because IP space is so fragmented, because IP
space needs to be conserved, because everyone needs to get more IP space,
becayse of route filtering, because of so many routes, because ...).

You are quite right, it's a tricky balancing act. And many of us do believe
that the right balance has not been struck yet and that allocation policies
need to be modified a bit to accomodate the current realities.

I was given some other mailing lists for dealing with those issues by someone.
I'll be subscribing there.

Hopefully the NAIPR list was one of them because that is where the new
policies will likely be hashed out. Send a subscribe message to
naipr-request@arin.net and before posting anything, review the background
material at http://www.arin.net including the list archives. At ISPCON 3
weeks ago, Kim Hubbard announced that 50 organizations had already applied
for ARIN membership.

Or is this listed on a web page? If not, I'll offer to host just such a
web page if I can get a pretty much complete list (I'll even write HTML to
get it going). But I'm sure most everyone here has some access to some
web space somewhere.

I think that the ISP info pages hosted at http://www.nanog.org already has
a pretty good collection of pointers to mailing lists.

3

Michael,

Michael Dillon wrote:

>We are at a point that we can pretty much nearly fill a /19 and will be
>past that point by the end of the year. Beyond that, I would think that
>when we need to keep coming back for address space, we would do it in
>increments of /19.

The problem is that although you know your goals and you also know that you
WILL reach your goals, there are other companies out there with wildly
inflated goals that will never even come close to reaching them. The
registry folks have to cut through the bullshit and try to avoid delegating
space to companies who don't really need the space and will never use it.

  Well if there were reasonable paramaters set, determining weather or
not the requests for allocations would be reasonable. RFC 2050 is
insuficient for this perpose, yet is the backdrop or primary document
that NAPIR is using as a guideline. Bad policy.

>I'm wondering if the policies are not being counter productive due to the
>apparently opposing nature of IP space vs route space (e.g. the one where
>people have to take more IP space to be routed, because of route filters,
>because of too many routes, because IP space is so fragmented, because IP
>space needs to be conserved, because everyone needs to get more IP space,
>becayse of route filtering, because of so many routes, because ...).

You are quite right, it's a tricky balancing act. And many of us do believe
that the right balance has not been struck yet and that allocation policies
need to be modified a bit to accomodate the current realities.

  A bit! That is an understatment at best.

>I was given some other mailing lists for dealing with those issues by someone.
>I'll be subscribing there.

Hopefully the NAIPR list was one of them because that is where the new
policies will likely be hashed out. Send a subscribe message to
naipr-request@arin.net and before posting anything, review the background
material at http://www.arin.net including the list archives. At ISPCON 3
weeks ago, Kim Hubbard announced that 50 organizations had already applied
for ARIN membership.

  Yep. And this announcment is premature until some of the allocation
pollicies are better worked out.

>Or is this listed on a web page? If not, I'll offer to host just such a
>web page if I can get a pretty much complete list (I'll even write HTML to
>get it going). But I'm sure most everyone here has some access to some
>web space somewhere.

I think that the ISP info pages hosted at http://www.nanog.org already has
a pretty good collection of pointers to mailing lists.

********************************************************
Michael Dillon voice: +1-650-482-2840
Senior Systems Architect fax: +1-650-482-2844
PRIORI NETWORKS, INC. http://www.priori.net

"The People You Know. The People You Trust."
********************************************************

Regards,