mailing list archives
Re: IP Filtering / CIDR Block Size / SprintLink
From: "Alex P. Rudnev" <alex () Relcom EU net>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:50:01 +0300 (MSK)
On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, David Schwartz wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Alex P. Rudnev wrote:
It's not big difference for us if there is 1 or 10 big ISP who make
I must repeat - it's not important for the small ISP and small
enterprises how many ISP over the world produce filtering - it's
important if the filtering exist somewhere or not.
Well, that's not quite true. If it's only one or two and they
don't filter their own customers, an ISP can simply get a T1 to everyone
who filters and keep their small blocks working.
It's amazing - if I'll recomend our small ISP bye 256K link Moscow/USA
(Sprint), guess what they say.
But I am misunderstanded at all - first (in September or earlier) no one
Registry over the world could not allocate for multi-home customer
address space less than /19 (32 networks) and this prevented many
enterprices or institutes from multihome connection to the Internet; just
now (due to your answers) nobody filter our 195.xx or other RIPE's blocks
except to /24 prefix; does it mean customers can get multihome access if
they have /22 or /20 address space?
And why Spring (and AGIS) have changed their filtering policy? Was it my
imagination or they have filtered 195.xx block to /19 prefixes?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -