New RIPE allocations outside 2001::/16 - filter update time!

[Iljitsch van Beijnum]

On 2-mei-2005, at 14:26, Daniel Roesen wrote:

>> I think it makes sense to differentiate between accepting /48s from
>> peers and accepting them from transits. I'd be happy to have a bunch
>> of /48s in my routing table that make traffic towards people within
>> the region flow more optimally, but I'm really not interested in /48s
>> from multiple timezones away.

> That works if your upstreams are regional tier3 ISPs, but most times
> not with tier2 (as they are most often intercontinental) or above.

What doesn't work in this case?? I don't understand what you're saying.

> And doesn't work when the link between the /48 user and his uplink  
> which
> provides the IP space is down and you don't have the /48.

That much is obvious.

Allowing all possible /48s out of all PA /32s and bigger just because  
the /32 might be down is a very bad idea because not only are you  
allowing unaggregatable PI (which is already very bad), but you're  
also setting yourself up for very big problems when people accidently  
deaggregate.

> But all that is no news to anyone. :-)

Right.

Anyone in Sweden for the big fight?