Re: [GROW] Last Call: <draft-ietf-grow-simple-va-08.txt> (Simple Virtual Aggregation (S-VA)) to Informational RFC

[Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>]

Hi SM,

Very good catch ... repurposing APNIC IPv4 address space was not 
intended. Simply the address space in the example was chosen completely 
randomly.

I will remove that text from the final version of the document.

Thank you very much for your review,
R.

> At 09:07 29-05-2012, The IESG wrote:
>
>> The IESG has received a request from the Global Routing Operations WG
>> (grow) to consider the following document:
>> - 'Simple Virtual Aggregation (S-VA)'
>> <draft-ietf-grow-simple-va-08.txt> as Informational RFC
>>
>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
>
> As a nit:
>
> "Generally, any more specific route which carries the same next hop as
> the VA-prefix 0/0 is eligible for suppression. However, provided
> that there was at least one less specific prefix (e.g., 1.0.0.0/8)
> and the next-hop of such prefix was different from that of the VA
> 0/0, those more specific prefixes (e.g., 1.1.1.0/24) which are
> otherwise subject to suppression would not be eligible for
> suppression anymore."
>
>  From APNIC:
>
> inetnum: 1.1.1.0 - 1.1.1.255
> netname: Debogon-prefix
> descr: APNIC Debogon Project
> descr: APNIC Pty Ltd
>
> Is there a reason why the Global Routing Operations WG is repurposing
> APNIC IPv4 address space in this draft?
>
> Regards,
> -sm
>
>