On Sun, Jul 10, 2005 at 09:56:38PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
>
> Since I've just run into the second of these in as many weeks, I
> thought this was perhaps worth a mail to the list.
>
> Many ISPs have import policies which reject exchange point blocks from
> external peers, for which there are many fine and logical arguments.
> Several of those ISPs reject "198.32.0.0/16 le 24" as part of that
> policy, however, believing that 198.32.0.0/16 is only used for exchange
> point assignments.
thank you joe.
since trying to dictate transit policy is bad, i've
only ever told people about peering... this statement
may help. Note that the use of a proxy-aggregate to
filter is just as bad or worse than a proxy-aggregate to
announce.
http://www.ep.net/policy.html
Our statement regarding the injection of EP.NET address space into a routing
system.
"anyone who has a properly delegated /32 address delegated/assigned from a /24
within 198.32.0.0/16 may announce that /24 to their peers. This is also true in
IPv6 space in that anyone with a properly delegated /64 assigned from a /48 in
the 2001:0478::/32 space may annouce that /48 to their peers. Prefix aggregates
are discouraged and as a general rule may be considered to be proxy
aggregations made by parties who are not direct participants in any address
assignments from these ranges."
--bill
