[c-nsp] [**** SPAM **** ] - Re: Filtering /24s - Found word(s) anal anal in the Text body

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 06:10:56PM -0800, Scott Granados wrote:
> As mentioned though, if I were you I'd be orderingup some rsp4's from
> ebay or from other sources and letting the /24's back in.

RSP4s wont't help much here (still only 256 Mb).  

You'd need RSP8s, and they are still very expensive.

The general question is "what is the benefit for me if I let in all
these /24s"?

So far, I've found two answers:

 - routing toward these destinations *might* follow better paths if you
   see the /24s

   -> this is why I'd go for a "drop /22 or longer from out of your region,
      and accept /24s from within your region" strategy

   Still saves you some 30k routes, but for networks that might be "near
   you" (peering points, etc.), you still get "best" routing.


 - I get more traffic from my BGP customers (if their other upstream
   sends them the /24s, and I don't, traffic for these prefixes will
   not go over my lines).  

   OTOH this would combine nicely with selling the link for a flat fee...

   (Of course it needs to be well-documented, so that customers know what
   your filtering policy is).


The drawback of letting in these /24s is

 - *I* have to pay (due to router ugprades, etc.) - and some *other* network
   gets the benefits.

   Specifically in the case of traffic engineering - usually it's "they
   have made not-so-intelligent-but-cheap purchasing decisions, and 
   everbody else is going to pay the cost".


So... everbody needs to make their own decision.

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert at greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de