Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: nsp: inet

Cidr report here?

 

 

nsp inet RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


jzp-inetops at rsuc

Dec 13, 2004, 1:43 PM

Post #1 of 6 (8468 views)
Permalink
Cidr report here?

Jeared, Geoff, et al,

Maybe the cidr report should get distribution here
for actual discussion of the data? I got several
private replies indicating that the spate of nanog-
banning has indeed had a chilling effect on real
dialog. I'd like to followup some of Michael's
further exmaination of the metrics showing imrpovment,
but don't feel it would be intellectually honest
to do so in a forum where I know people are interested
and have value to add yet are self-censoring.

Cc'd to people who publicly commented and may not
be on inet-ops, bcc'd to those wwho privately
commented for similar reasons.

Cheers,

Joe

--
RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE


tom at unitedlayer

Dec 13, 2004, 2:15 PM

Post #2 of 6 (7890 views)
Permalink
Cidr report here? [In reply to]

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004, Joe Provo wrote:
> Maybe the cidr report should get distribution here
> for actual discussion of the data?

I think thats a great idea.

> I got several private replies indicating that the spate of nanog-
> banning has indeed had a chilling effect on real dialog.

I'd say thats right on the money, I know quite a few people who feel
exactly the same way - lets go for it!


jared at puck

Dec 13, 2004, 11:09 PM

Post #3 of 6 (7871 views)
Permalink
Cidr report here? [In reply to]

On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 01:43:46PM -0500, Joe Provo wrote:
> Jeared, Geoff, et al,

Not sure who the Jeared person is, but speaking as
a Jared-type of person, i've permitted that address to post to the
list.

> Maybe the cidr report should get distribution here
> for actual discussion of the data? I got several
> private replies indicating that the spate of nanog-
> banning has indeed had a chilling effect on real
> dialog. I'd like to followup some of Michael's
> further exmaination of the metrics showing imrpovment,
> but don't feel it would be intellectually honest
> to do so in a forum where I know people are interested
> and have value to add yet are self-censoring.
>
> Cc'd to people who publicly commented and may not
> be on inet-ops, bcc'd to those wwho privately
> commented for similar reasons.

sure, i'm fairly straighforward with the lists that
i host, i want them to be of techincal value and not sales stuff.

i could also create a cidr-report-discuss type list, but a forum
like this would probally be better suited, as it may get a broader
audience. (but i could also be wrong).

- jared

--
Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared [at] puck
clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.


randy at psg

Dec 13, 2004, 11:23 PM

Post #4 of 6 (7877 views)
Permalink
Cidr report here? [In reply to]

as folk are censored by an fool from another non-ops-run list,
having this as one place to discuss the cidr and ris reports
would be good.

the real question is what can effectively be done to get
clueless crap out of the routing tables. the s/n in bgp
approaches that of a mailing list. but it may easier to
apply technology to the bgp universe; e.g., see discussion
on c-nsp of auto-drop of covered prefixes. to get actual
discussion moving, my opinion is appended.

randy

---

From: randy [at] psg (Randy Bush)
Date: Wed Dec 1 20:51:25 2004
Subject: [c-nsp] Growing BGP tables
References: <OF49CD5C93.07A11904-ON85256F5D.004AD609-85256F5D.004CD194 [at] census>
<0D6AB216-4403-11D9-8994-000D93282A96 [at] Hughes>
Message-ID: <16814.29973.27522.38883 [at] ran>

i proposed to rodney today, there are three types of prefix
pollution.
o pure crap, such as that we see on top of the weekly
report
o someone traffic engineering
o legitimate holes (someone moving from at&t's 12/8)

a hardcore <bleep> such as i might just filter them all

a friendlier type might just dump longer prefixes if they
had the same origin asn (the new part of the suggestion)

a southern californian might only dump a longer prefix
if it has the same next hop as the covering prefix

randy


jzp-inetops at rsuc

Dec 14, 2004, 3:16 AM

Post #5 of 6 (7877 views)
Permalink
Cidr report here? [In reply to]

On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 11:09:15PM -0500, Jared Mauch wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 01:43:46PM -0500, Joe Provo wrote:
> > Jeared, Geoff, et al,
>
> Not sure who the Jeared person is, but speaking as
> a Jared-type of person, i've permitted that address to post to the
> list.

As well as "Jared, master of Puck" you'll also going to be known as
"Jared, forgiver of typos". :-P

> i could also create a cidr-report-discuss type list, but a forum
> like this would probally be better suited, as it may get a broader
> audience. (but i could also be wrong).

My point exactly; rather than pigeonhole into something specifically
about the report, it is high time this available generalized discussion
forum was used. Hopefully it will spur additional use of this resource.

As ever, thanks!

Joe

--
RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE


ralph at istop

Dec 14, 2004, 7:59 AM

Post #6 of 6 (7896 views)
Permalink
Cidr report here? [In reply to]

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004, Randy Bush wrote:

> the real question is what can effectively be done to get
> clueless crap out of the routing tables.

The design of BGP favors the crap, so you'll have to redesign BGP. ;-)
I don't want to aggregate the routes I send to my customers because:
a) I'll get less of their traffic
b) the customers will ask why they're not getting a full table

-Ralph

nsp inet RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.