RE: The Cidr Report
- Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:05:37 -0800
> > ASnum NetsNow NetsAggr NetGain % Gain Description
> > AS18566 751 6 745 99.2% CVAD Covad
> not to justify the expense, but perhaps covad is renumbering from one
> block to another? Looking at their advertisments I see lots of /23 or
> blocks inside their larger covering routes... So either they
> to renumber more gracefully, or they forgot their prefix-list outbound
> williams and exodus ?
> perhaps covad can explain? or silently cover up the 'mistake' (which
> acceptable as well...)
I've been secretly hoping no one would notice Covad's ascension to the
number one spot (which we've held for well over a month now ;). I
actually made it through the last NANOG without a single mention of
Covad's route bloat!
There are no mistakes or excuses here. And there's definitely no
renumbering going on.
We were actually fully aggregated until an unfortunate incident this
past May involving a distant service provider leaking our specifics.
Gigs of traffic somehow vanished into Eastern Europe. The net result was
It's unlikely we will aggregate down to less than 10 netblocks again.
However, we do make every effort to aggregate where possible.
Our superblocks are also being advertised, for those of you that want to
filter our routes.
Want to discuss further? Great. Call me or email me directly. Contact
info is below.
Think you can do it better? Even better. It turns out I'm hiring. :)