Sprint's route filters and Europe
yakov at cisco.com
Mon Jun 17 19:44:47 UTC 1996
> > >From my (admittedly biased) perspective, it would seem there are two
> > options:
> > A) The socalist approach
> > B) The capitalist approach
> And, generally, I would have to say that for a resource such as IP addresses
> and Internet registration services, option A is certainly better suited
> to the task at hand.
Why option A is "certainly better suited" ?
> > Every time someone (who me?) brings up option B, we go chasing merrily
> > down one or more of the following ratholes:
> > 1) we need to conserve route table space, lets charge for that,
> > not addresses (irrelevant)
> Not irrelevant. Highly relevant, but not the right solution to that
> problem either.
Why this is not "the right solution" ?
> > 2) AT&T (or some other evil speculator) will buy up all the
> > address space (and ISPs are just going to sit idly by?)
> Depending on the situation, it might be difficult for them to do anything
> effective about it. It is a real danger, and could easily occur.
Why do you think this is "a real danger, and could easily occur" ?
More information about the NANOG