[address-policy-wg] IPv6 access to K-root

On 2-mrt-05, at 3:01, Daniel Roesen wrote:

> I consider 15-hop AS_PATHs crossing ponds multiple times and tunnels 
> all
> over etc with 500ms+ RTT quite fatal, compared to let's say 3-hop
> AS_PATH all native.

[...]

> The problem operators on the net don't update filters, let
> alone read "nice documents" how to do things properly.

[...]

> You cannot filter PA-more-specific-multihomer-prefixes away
> without risking to lose connectivity to them. If the provider aggregate
> has routing problems (be it interdomain or even intradomain) and your
> transit cloud doesn't see the more-specific prefix announced by the
> multihomer, you lose connectivity.

[...]

It's important to separate fundamental problems that aren't fixable, or 
require unpleasant compromises to be fixed, from the incidental 
problems that can be fixed in time and with education. The ones you 
list all fall in the latter category, IMO. The problem with the routing 
table size is that when it gets out of hand, there isn't much that you 
can do. We all know aggregation in IPv4 could be much better than it is 
now but still there is nothing anyone seems to be able to do to help 
the situation.