To quote from the document: "Q: How would folk announce longer prefixes for DDoS protection? Mitigation/counter-argument: As operators accept /24s today, when the allocation size is a /22, it might be wise to accept prefixes longer than a /24 when the allocation size is /24. Of course, this would be in the well-documented address range(s) where /24s are allocated."
-- okay, this is fine... wait... "Summary of Proposal [..]If the minimum globally-routable prefix changes from a /24 to a smaller prefix, the initial IPv4 allocation should also change to match." -- so, how do those things match? The issue about announcing longer prefixes is one hundred percent correct. As of now, reducing the initial allocation to /24 renders newcomers unable to make use of trivial BGP failover mechanisms. I'd support the idea, but no earlier than the minimum globally-routable IPv4 prefix is changed to /25. Or, to say, initial allocation might be /25 if the MGRP will be /26. | Artyom Gavrichenkov | gpg: 2deb 97b1 0a3c 151d b67f 1ee5 00e7 94bc 4d08 9191 | mailto: [email protected] | fb: ximaera | telegram: xima_era | skype: xima_era | tel. no: +7 916 515 49 58
