Sprint's route filters and Europe

Gopi K Garge gopi at ece.iisc.ernet.in
Tue Jun 18 11:09:17 UTC 1996

David R. Conrad sez:

> >> 	3) if you charge, then poor organizations can't connect
> >> 	   to the Internet (so who's paying for their connectivity?)
> >Specific case of the merit good argument.

> Good argument?  If an organization wants to connect to the Internet, it is
> almost certain the address cost will be so far down in the noise as to be
> undetectable.  If address costs were a significant portion of the total
> costs, there is always NAT/ALG.

	I am sure that there are enough mature technology solutions 
	to ensure that "poor" organisations can still use the 
  Internet effectively. The bottom line is that addresses **are**
	a scarce resource. The APNIC has been encouraging ISPs in
	the region to do sub-C allocations and that will reap its
	own benefits despite the fact that there is an overhead
	in maintenance. 

	There is also a substantial amount of user education that is
	required in this part of the world to convey the fact that 
	it is not **necessary** that all the hosts in your organisation
	be on the Internet. (I wouldn't see this statement as out of context
	here, since the discussion is all about charging, anyway ..:) )
	 In quite a few ways, the AP region is distinct in its approach to the Internet. 

	BTW, cld I ask if the GISD document is available in any complete
	form ? 


--Gopi Garge

More information about the NANOG mailing list