On Wed, 6 April 2005 12:43:49 +0200, Arnold Nipper wrote: [..]

...

...

Are you sure that your peers are reading SWINOG??? Maybe the swissix list would have been appropriate...

Posted to both lists :-)

Imho /dev/null would have been best ;-) It's easy to see that such emails are waste of ressources ...

I cannot agree more.

Thanks, Alexander

On 06.04.2005 13:04 Pascal Gloor wrote

...

...

Imho /dev/null would have been best ;-) It's easy to see that such emails are waste of ressources ...

I cannot agree more.

True.

Except your upstreams, who's filtering you on exact prefix match? I'm not sure you would have enough nvram to store such huge access-lists anyway... :-)

I run full prefix-filter-lists on the route-servers at DE-CIX. No problem so far ...

but anyway if you want to contact your upstream there are better ways than the swinog or swiss-ix list ... hopefully ;-)

Arnold

everyone's answering because we want to fill up the archive because the archive is not /dev/null ;-)

-steven

-----Original Message----- From: swinog-bounces@lists.swinog.ch [mailto:swinog-bounces@lists.swinog.ch]On Behalf Of Gunther Stammwitz Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 4:15 PM To: swinog@swinog.ch Subject: AW: [swinog] AW: [SwissIX] New Prefix

...

Imho /dev/null would have been best ;-) It's easy to see that such emails are waste of ressources ...

Arnold

Then why do you answer to my email?

---

swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog