Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations

Andrew Partan asp at uunet.uu.net
Tue Jan 30 19:41:21 UTC 1996

> The proper solution is for all these companies to form a consortium. The 
> consortium would run the NAP and contract with multiple NSP's for 
> service. In that case, the NSP's are not providing transit to 
> non-customers because the consortium is the customer and every ISP who 
> joins the consortium gets multihoming reliability outside the region. 

Ah - we may have something that works - we have someone (the
consortium) being paid (by these companies) to provide (or further
purchase) transit.

However I'm not sure how this works of one (or more) of these companies
decides to buy or provide transit on their own (outside of the

Lets pick a company (call it X) that decides to do this.  Now X's
routes have to be known outside of the consortium's aggregate (since X
is providing its own global transit and since X does not want to give
free transit to the entire aggregate).

Humm - this does not seem to scale.

I suppose that if you find a set of companies that are all willing to
be part of the consortium & just part of the consortium, then you could
do addressing for this consortium as a whole.  Hey!  I think that we
just invented provider (consortium) based addressing again.

	--asp at uunet.uu.net (Andrew Partan)

More information about the NANOG mailing list