Trouble reaching and

Niels Bakker niels=cluenet at
Tue Oct 17 21:10:40 CEST 2006

* pekkas at (Pekka Savola) [Tue 17 Oct 2006, 20:24 CEST]:
>On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, Niels Bakker wrote:
>>There's a case here a normal IPv6 multihoming address policy that I will 
>>not make on this list :)
>Why is RIPE NCC advertising the /42 anyway?  Their connectivity would 
>be much better if they didn't.

They are an AMS-IX member and have an open peering policy.  This would 
be worthless for them if they could not attract traffic there.

Perhaps connectivity would be better if other networks didn't filter.  
Or they could set no-export but then they'd be bitten by networks that 
reset all communities inbound.  In the end you're always dependent on 
other people's networks to deliver the bits to your border routers.

It depends on what you call "much better."

	-- Niels.

More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list