filtering long prefixes

bmanning at ISI.EDU bmanning at ISI.EDU
Sun Sep 24 18:43:32 UTC 1995

> Are you suggesting some sort of exchange point or NAP specifically to 
> break out longer prefixes from shorter prefixes that cannot be 
> topologically aggregated? Would something like this enable people
> to maintain provider independent addressing (i.e. no renumbering) by 
> merely paying a fee to an exchange point that is well connected and 
> settling for less optimal routing?
> If this will work in practice, it seems like the perfect tradeoff. On the 
> one hand you must renumber when changing providers but you get optimal 
> routing. On the other hand, you avoid renumbering but you pay a few bucks 
> and have less than optimal routing.
> Am I missing anything here?

	Perhaps a couple of things:
		- Common transit agreements for all particpants
		- Single point of attachment, ie you must renumber
		  if you home to another provider or exchange.


More information about the NANOG mailing list