Sprint's route filters and Europe

Yakov Rekhter 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 mailing list