it's efficient to set rules in order of increasing specificity, with the more specific rules (by definition for a smaller address range) taking priority.
e.g. in this case you could say "route the 256-address-space to a black hole" + "route the 64-address-subset to the real youtube", with the latter rule taking precedence. doing the same thing without precedence would require at least three rules, "route the X addresses before the 64-address-subset to a black hole", "route the X addresses after the 64-address-subset to a black hole", "route the 64-address-space to the real youtube". -rishab On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 22:36 +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Lawnun wrote: > > > Why does shrinking the number of addresses create 'priority' as far as > > the BGP is concerned? Is there some merit to fewer addresses, as opposed > > to more? > > Something about specific routes being preferred. That's stuff you learn in > cisco router classes. Oh, it didn't work - not for all the cases.
