This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/routing-wg@ripe.net/
[routing-wg]More specific prefix announce
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg]More specific prefix announce
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg]More specific prefix announce
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Michael Hallgren
m.hallgren at free.fr
Fri Sep 2 11:12:40 CEST 2005
> -----Message d'origine----- > De : routing-wg-admin at ripe.net > [mailto:routing-wg-admin at ripe.net] De la part de Volodymyr Yakovenko > Envoyé : vendredi 2 septembre 2005 00:27 > À : dendy at ulm.udsu.ru > Cc : routing-wg at ripe.net > Objet : Re: [routing-wg]More specific prefix announce > > On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 12:01:16AM +0500, dendy at ulm.udsu.ru wrote: > >Hello. > >Unfortunately, I'm not so experienced in the question to anwer that. > >Therefore I ask for help and will be thankful for any clarification. > > > >We have a /20 ASSIGNED PI address block and an AS. Is it allowed by > >RIPE policy to intentionally announce more specific prefix > than one we > >have from our AS to upstream ASes? > >For example, announce our X.X.0.0/20 to upstream A and announce both > >X.X.0.0/20 and > >X.X.6.0/23 to B? > > It is not disallowed. What's more - it is common practice to > perform incoming capacity engineering in this way. But, IMHO, preferably in a multiple interconnection to a single AS scenario only (having that AS export the shortest prefix only). Mh > > >-- > >Denis Tatarskikh [UdSU/MF] [UdSU/IC] mailto:dendy at udsu.ru > > > > -- > Regards, > Volodymyr. > >
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg]More specific prefix announce
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg]More specific prefix announce
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]