Subject: RE: null-routed aggregated global unicast (was: another view offc00::/7)

From: "Michel Py" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 00:37:29 -0700

Benny,

>> jj wrote:
>> Outsiders can't even tell it's not a normal prefix (which is
>> a blessing and a curse), let alone state that they also
>> purchased the prefix from some other ISP.

> Benny Amorsen wrote:
> I think that is a curse. It means that in normal circumstances
> I can expect to see what was supposed to be my unique addresses
> advertised by routing protocols as part of a larger aggregated
> space.

A curse it is but a blessing it is also. Look from the other
prospective: I'm the ISP that provides you the block:

- I give you a /48 out of my /32. The /32 costs me 2.5k/yr so the /48
costs me $0.04/yr plus overhead. BFD.

- When we get out of this "everyone-gives-free-transit-to-everyone"
business model which does not make sense, I don't want to pay for your
traffic because what I sold you or gave you is the address, not the
bandwidth. So I reserved a /36 out of my /32 for people like you and I
route it directly to null0.

- Why is this a blessing? Because there will be enough people that
filter longer prefixes. What we are talking here is private addresses.
So if you peer with a business partner and they get a specific route to
the /48 I gave you, fine. Otherwise, it does not matter if the traffic
goes into an unreachable or if it goes into my null0, and there are a
fair amount of people that says it's preferable to route traffic that
you want to go nowhere into a blackhole instead of bouncing it.

> I would just prefer that /my/ non-routable addresses stayed
> out of the global routing tables.

Look back from your own prospective again:
What you want is your /48 not to be there; if a /32 that encompasses
your /48 is announced and if the /36 that encompasses your /48 is routed
to null0 at the destination, it's a blessing.

Michel.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Benny Amorsen <[email-masked]>
Date: 12 Jun 2003 11:09:02 +0200

> to null0 at the destination, it's a blessing.

It seems to me that having a global blackholed /10 is a lot nicer to the
routing table than a lot of blackholed /36's.

Perhaps routers have advanced to the state where this is no longer a
significant concern.

/Benny

---

From: Shannon -jj Behrens <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:34:23 -0700

> routing table than a lot of blackholed /36's.

It would be nice if there were only one global blackholed /10, but the
blackholed /36's don't have to be in the global routing table.  Hence,
it's not a big deal.

> Perhaps routers have advanced to the state where this is no longer a

If that were really the case, then we could use PI ;)

-jj

-- 
Hacker is to software engineer as 
Climbing Mt. Everest is to building a Denny's there.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------