Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[AfriNIC-rpd] AFPUB-2006-GEN-001 and Anycast

Owen DeLong owen at
Wed Apr 11 08:15:42 UTC 2012

On Apr 10, 2012, at 11:34 PM, Graham Beneke wrote:

> On 07/04/2012 10:34, Alan Barrett wrote:
>> What's wrong with the obvious approach? Like this:
>> 1. get a /18 block.
>> 2. carve out a /24 from inside the /18.
>> 3. announce the /18 to everybody.
>> 4. announce the /24 to only some peers.
>> Not so obvious:
>> 5. optionally, tag the /24 with a special community to encourage your
>> peers not to propagate the announcement further. Perhaps no-export
>> would be a reasonable choice.
> There is a specific requirement that the prefix does not appear in the routing table of certain peers and is un-routable from their perspective. Thus it can not appear as part of an aggregate either.
> You can read the details in this GSMA document:
> While I understand that their could be other ways to achieve the objectives, a global body has already standardised this across many of our members. Is it not wise to build policies that adequately provide for these requirements?
> -- 
> Graham Beneke
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at

Wiser would be for that body to recognize the realities of internet routing and RIR policy and revise their standards to fit that reality.

Expecting the entire internet to adapt to the mobile broadband corner case instead of the other way around strikes me as ill-advised at best.


More information about the RPD mailing list