why /8 announments are bad...

In return, would Covad please consider performing some meaningful form of
aggregation or other measures to reduce the amount of noise that is being
passed across the global routing tables that originates from Covad?

AS Report

suggests that Covad could withdraw some 483 BGP routing table entries,
reducing the total number of entires originated by Covad from 490
to an equivalent set of 8 aggregate routes.

  perhaps this is not the time/place to raise the point,
  but I'm coming to the conclusion that there is increasing
  pushback to -NOT- announce space that is not in active use.

  So-called "dark" space, i.e. the unused interstitial gaps
  in delegated space that is the the product of sparse delegation
  techniques, is perhaps more of a hazzard, esp. wrt. spam/traffic
  generation than might have been considered in the past. think
  forged source addresses...

  if this is a rational line of argument, then two tactics present
  themselves: 1) announce the individual, more specifics. this
  has the effect of further bloating the routing table, incuring
  the rath of the self-appointed routing table police (so watch out
  Covad, don't do what Telstra did... :slight_smile: 2) keep my number of
  routing table entries consistant by "grooming" back my sparse
  delegations into more homogenous groups, e.g. renumber folks in
  the four /28s spread across the /19 into a single /26 - then
  withdraw the /19 and announce the /26 in its place.

  the number of routing table entries remains consistant and the
  number of possible entries for forged source addresses is
  dramatically reduced. Of course this will require a major rethink/
  rewrite of most ISPs engineering practice/operating procedures,
  as it will be much more common to see legitimate, long prefixs in
  the routing system.
  as usual, YMMV.