the NIC?

peter at peter at
Fri Oct 1 20:31:30 UTC 1993


I don't think network service providers should take address blocks
hierarchically related to  allocations from other service providers in
the US.  I don't believe this is an issue of multi homing, it is simply
the issue of minimizing the probability of customers having to change
their addresses.  If an access provider changes its "long haul"
provider it would be nice if there were no pressure for the  customers
of the "access" provider to change addresses.

>From my reading of the Rekhter & Li CIDR paper I believe the allocation
strategy is to assign blocks to immediate providers ("retail" or
"access"?) and that those providers get their allocation from the
regional NIC, which for this purpose would be the InterNic acting as
the NIC for the U.S.

>From a U.S. point of view I could see carving the U.S. up into a few
regions (probably a max of 4) where immediate/access/retail providers for a
restricted region (provider XXX is a dialup provider for the NY area)
get their allocation out of those geographically defined blocks rather than a
generic undifferentiated US block.



More information about the NANOG mailing list