ULA and RIR cost-recovery
Michael.Dillon at radianz.com
Michael.Dillon at radianz.com
Thu Nov 25 13:16:45 UTC 2004
> > Believe me, this will occur. It will probably
> >start with "Well, we've got this connection to you and this connection
to
> >ISP B, and, you guys peer, so, can you pass our ULA prefixes along to
each
> >other?"
>
> Talk to the other ISP, work out pricing, and sell an IP over IP
solution,
> MPLS solution or some such. Look at this as an opportunity, instead of a
> problem, and there's money to be made without leaking the prefixes into
the
> backbone. Embrace progress and conceive of creative solutions to
customer
> needs.
In today's network, is there anyone left who uses 1500 byte
MTUs in their core? Surely even the people with Ethernet
switches in their PoPs are now using jumbo frames. In
yesterday's Internet, encapsulation was a problem because
of the fragmentation required, but it should be a routine
thing in today's Internet where fragmentation is avoided.
If ULAs, i.e. site local addresses, need to be visible
at two disjoint locations in the network, we have the
technical means to do this without using up global
routing table slots. The same thing applies to geographical
addresses which may sometimes need to be made visible
in another region. We *CAN* do things at the edges
of the network without burdening the core.
--Michael Dillon
More information about the NANOG
mailing list