[117894] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ISP customer assignments
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Adrian Chadd)
Mon Oct 5 20:33:09 2009
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 08:28:58 +0800
From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@creative.net.au>
To: Joe Greco <jgreco@ns.sol.net>
In-Reply-To: <200910060018.n960IBHe095277@aurora.sol.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon, Oct 05, 2009, Joe Greco wrote:
> > I'm sorry, but seeing a good fraction of my local IX simply containing
> > a few ISP's deaggregated view of their "local" internal networks versus
> > a sensible allocation policy makes me cry. IPv6 may just make this
> > worse. IPv6 certainly won't make it "better".
>
> That would seem to be an IX administrative problem.
Sure, if you don't want to see those local networks. But since the cost
of getting from "Perth" to "! Perth" is (was?) a lot higher than what
you guys even pay for international transit at non-Cogent rates, we have
some sort of desire to keep as much traffic local as possible.
Hence "Local only" announcements.
> As it stands, there are lots and lots and lots of AS's that advertise
> multiple blocks of space. Ideally, one would rather see a large ISP
> get a single delegation, rather than advertising 50 or 500.
.. and what about their customers with portable address space?
What if every single customer decides they now want to multihome, dynamic
endpoint resolution stuff (LISA?) isn't ready, and companies simply join
the RIR and buy their own IP space? :)
Adrian
