20402 routing entries

Martin Lee Schoffstall schoff at us.psi.com
Fri Apr 15 21:28:57 UTC 1994

PSI is easy (when compared to the below)

I can't imagine going back to 5000 seperate companies and say

"Give me your network number, by such and such a date, or I turn you off"

I'll be glad to refer their lawyers to Peter, LLNL, the FNC or anyone who
has a big wallet/purse/money-bag-under-bed to settle the issue.

That is a non-deterministic path, it will not be ruled by fiat.

A clean slate as below (tounge in cheek or not) is the chance to create
the perfect information state (make sure all transactions are checkpointed
through the FinCen etc).  And of course there are other possabilities for
clean slates.  (Possabilities not probabilities btw).


> I tell ya, fellas, Marty is right. Renumbering is a looser. People will
> give us more trouble than its worth it. E.g., PSI  would never go for
> giving up their Class A, as it means too much to them. Must help them
> milking the cows. Lets just bandaid the current addressing structure
> and protocols as best we can for a little longer, and under the premise
> that we have to jettison the IP address space anyway and completely and
> each and every bit a little while down the road. We should have gone
> for CLNP years ago (didn't Clark suggest that in, uh, '86 or so
> already)? If only for the sole benefit of a forced renumbering by means
> of a brand new and hierarchical addressing space called NSAPs. Who
> cares about petty details like the protocols chosen, and some
> bells'n'whistles nonsense in each packet.  The address is what counts.
> Color and size of the envelope doesn't matter. Right on, Marty!

More information about the NANOG mailing list