Subject: [GROW] draft-vegoda-no-more-unallocated-slash8s-01

From: Leo Vegoda <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 10:29:58 -0800

Hi,

I have updated this document to incorporate improvements suggested by Carlos Pignataro. 

Regards,

Leo

Subject: New Version Notification for draft-vegoda-no-more-unallocated-slash8s-01
From: IETF I-D Submission Tool <[email-masked]>
To: Leo Vegoda <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 10:26:34 -0800

A new version of I-D, draft-vegoda-no-more-unallocated-slash8s-01.txt has been successfully submitted by Leo Vegoda and posted to the IETF repository.

Filename:	 draft-vegoda-no-more-unallocated-slash8s
Revision:	 01
Title:		 Time to Remove Filters for Previously Unallocated IPv4 /8s
Creation_date:	 2011-02-18
WG ID:		 Independent Submission
Number_of_pages: 6

Abstract:
It has been common for network administrators to filter IP traffic
coming from unallocated IPv4 address space.  Now that there are no
longer any unallocated IPv4 /8s, this practise is more complicated,
fragile and expensive.  Network administrators are advised to remove
filters based on the registration status of the address space.

This document explains why any remaining filters for unallocated IPv4
/8s should now be removed on border routers and documents those IPv4
unicast prefixes that should not be routed across the public
Internet.

The IETF Secretariat.

---

From: Christopher Morrow <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:36:00 -0500

> I have updated this document to incorporate improvements suggested by Carlos Pignataro.

terrific, thanks!

So, are there any more comments from folk, or should we decide now if
GROW should take this draft up?

-chris

---

From: Joe Provo <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 08:06:43 -0500

> GROW should take this draft up?
 
Minor nit: "224.0.0.0/4" listed in section 4 steps on the GLOP 233/8,
specifically intended for inter-provider traffic, and as such fail the
"should never be routed across the Internet" test.

CHeers,

Joe

-- 
             RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE

---

From: Leo Vegoda <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 12:28:05 -0800

Hi Joe,

> "should never be routed across the Internet" test.

It was my understanding that MBGP peerings use unicast addresses and that the multicast addresses themselves are not announced in the "global routing table". That being said, I will defer to those with more multicast experience that me. 

Thanks,

Leo