A proposal was made some years ago, which I thought was by Tony Li, but, IIRC, he says it wasn't original with him. It does require cooperation from competitors, but can reduce the number of announcements. Under some circumstances, it may cause blackholing, but so can /24 filtering.
The idea is to establish bilateral blocks of provider space. Let us say Provider A and Provider B recognize that they have a significant number of common multihomed customers. Arbitrarily, one of the providers (assume A) starts off with a block -- let's say a /19 or /20 to which both providers will assign their multihomed customers. A and B peer and send more-specifics to each other.
To the outside world, however, A advertises its largest aggregate plus the multihomed block. B advertises this block of Provider A space as well as its own aggregates.
If A and B do not peer, the likelihood of blackholes become much higher since they may not see the more-specifics in the multihomed block.
Has anyone reexamined this proposal lately?
- Re: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s Phil Rosenthal
- Re: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s Andy Ellifson
- Re: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s K. Scott Bethke
- RE: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s Forrest
- RE: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s H. Michael Smith, Jr.
- RE: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s H. Michael Smith, Jr.
- RE: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s Forrest
- Re: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s Marshall Eubanks
- Pitfalls of _accepting_ /24s jlewis
- RE: Pitfalls of _accepting_ /24s Terry Baranski
- RE: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s Howard C. Berkowitz
- RE: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s H. Michael Smith, Jr.
- RE: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s McBurnett, Jim
- RE: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s Peter E. Fry
- RE: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s Ejay Hire
- Re: Pitfalls of annoucing /24s Brian Bruns