[12263] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: too many routes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jay R. Ashworth)
Thu Sep 11 14:33:04 1997
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 14:02:31 -0400
From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us>
To: "Sean M. Doran" <smd@clock.org>
Cc: Sanjay Dani <sanjay@professionals.com>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <yten6w3b8k.fsf@cesium.clock.org>; from "Sean M. Doran" <smd@clock.org> on Wed, Sep 10, 1997 at 09:11:55PM -0400
On Wed, Sep 10, 1997 at 09:11:55PM -0400, Sean M. Doran wrote:
> Sanjay Dani <sanjay@professionals.com> writes:
> > There are backbone providers and there are providers of specialized
> > ISP or hosting or security etc. services that need independent* IP
> > address space and do not have to waste resources on building a private
> > "backbone".
>
> NAT.
Perhaps I misunderstood Sanjay, Sean, but I believe his concern was
that the addresses _not be the property of an upstream (ie: backbone)
provider_ to provide flexibility of connection choice.
NAT will not solve this problem; it resides at too low a level of the
theoretical architecture, being used primarily to avoid renumbering of
internetworks. This isn't a network numbering problem, it's a routing
problem.
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com
Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued
The Suncoast Freenet "People propose, science studies, technology
Tampa Bay, Florida conforms." -- Dr. Don Norman +1 813 790 7592
