At 09:07 29-05-2012, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the Global Routing Operations WG
(grow) to consider the following document:
- 'Simple Virtual Aggregation (S-VA)'
<draft-ietf-grow-simple-va-08.txt> as Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
As a nit:
"Generally, any more specific route which carries the same next hop as
the VA-prefix 0/0 is eligible for suppression. However, provided
that there was at least one less specific prefix (e.g., 1.0.0.0/8)
and the next-hop of such prefix was different from that of the VA
0/0, those more specific prefixes (e.g., 1.1.1.0/24) which are
otherwise subject to suppression would not be eligible for
suppression anymore."
From APNIC:
inetnum: 1.1.1.0 - 1.1.1.255
netname: Debogon-prefix
descr: APNIC Debogon Project
descr: APNIC Pty Ltd
Is there a reason why the Global Routing Operations WG is repurposing
APNIC IPv4 address space in this draft?
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
