Addr: NET99 sabotages IGC's routes

[<rwoundy () vnet IBM COM>]

*** Resending note of 03/18/96 12:43
Folks,

May I inject some list-relevant discussion to this cat-fight?

> >  Fortunately, MCI was able to reconfigure our access lists at their
> > router to allow us to broadcast competing more specific routes for each
> > individual class C in the CIDR block. Thus (more or less) restoring IGC's
> > net connectivity.

> More specifics aren't competing.  They take precedence.  Sometimes it's
> better to be silent and thought dumb...

I don't care to choose sides in this dispute.

But as a consequence of this dispute, the size of the standard
default-free route tables has grown as a result of the IGC/MCI
de-aggregation of routes. This is a bad thing, right?

Looking at IBM/Advantis's router at MAE-East, for example,
I see 205.198/16 from (AS3830), 205.198.244/22 from (AS3561 AS5799),
and 205.198.244/24 from (AS3561 AS5799). AS3830 == Net99,
AS3561 == MCI, and AS5799 == IGC.

Seems like the rest of the Internet is the long-term victim here...
-- Richard Woundy, (not speaking for) IBM