From owner-freebsd-isp Sat Aug 21 11:26:51 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from loki.intrepid.net (intrepid.net [204.71.127.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52D6814EE4 for ; Sat, 21 Aug 1999 11:26:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mark@loki.intrepid.net) Received: (from mark@localhost) by loki.intrepid.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA21116; Sat, 21 Aug 1999 14:25:51 -0400 Message-ID: <19990821142551.F22209@intrepid.net> Date: Sat, 21 Aug 1999 14:25:51 -0400 From: Mark Conway Wirt To: pam@polynet.lviv.ua, isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [Offtopic Q] Smallest network feasible to announce as separate AS route in Internet References: <19990820181556.48796153B5@hub.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2 In-Reply-To: <19990820181556.48796153B5@hub.freebsd.org>; from pam@polynet.lviv.ua on Fri, Aug 20, 1999 at 09:15:32PM +0300 Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, Aug 20, 1999 at 09:15:32PM +0300, pam@polynet.lviv.ua wrote: > Hello! > > I have one very practical question. I've heard that backbone routers > in the Internet have installed route filters blocking BGP > announcements of very small networks. > > What is the smallest network prefix, which could be safely > announced as multi-homed (via separate AS number) in the > Internet? > > Thanks for help and appologies for being offtopic. Used to be that a /19 was the safest that not filtered by various providers (unless you could get space in the older allocations -- I've seen /28's routed in there :-), but with ARIN changing it's allocation policies, more and more providers are relaxing the limits. A /19 should be a safe bet, though. If you can't get one, make sure that the address space you get is in the old, not-filtered region (can't remember the range, but someone on the list may know) --Mark To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message