North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: Customer AS
- From: Daniel Karrenberg
- Date: Wed Aug 21 21:07:08 1996
> Curtis Villamizar <email@example.com> writes:
> In message <199608170146.SAA20928@lint.cisco.com>, Paul Ferguson writes:
> > In fact, the <draft-hubbard-registry-guidelines-05.txt> draft indicates
> > that this is one of the few acceptable instances when allocation can be
> > done by one of the various registries and not by (one of) the upstream
> > service provider(s). ...
> draft-hubbard-registry-guidelines-05.txt is wrong on this one.
Just for the record: I is one of the few acceptable instances and certainly
does not represent common practise, to the contrary! All regional IRs
recommend using address space from one of the providers.
> If the route comes from one of the providers CIDR blocks, the other
> more specific route can be ignored farther away in the topology. If
> it is a provider independent address it can't be dropped without
> losing connectivity to it.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -