shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from John Payne)

Thu Mar 2 21:38:58 UTC 2006

>> The other PI assignment policies that have been proposed either 
>> require that you have a /19 already in IPv4 (lots of hosting 
>> companies don't have anything this size), or have tens/hundreds of 
>> thousands of devices.
> 
> It has also been suggested that the simple presence of
> multihoming should be sufficient justification for PI space.
> 
Current PI policy in the ARIN region is /22 for IPv4.

>> Even if a hosting company does get a /32 or a /44 or whatever, the 
>> "you can't deaggregate your assignment at all" policy rules out 
>> having multiple independent POPs unless you somehow arrange to get 
>> multiple allocations(which isn't possible now).
> 
> People have done creative things with tunnels in the past. 
> The widespread existence of MPLS backbones makes that 
> even easier. You will always be able to find one situation
> that simply will not fit a given policy. Regardless, we still
> need to have some reasonable policy that creates a level
> playing field, does not unecessarily restrain trade, and
> creates possibilities that smart entrepreneurs can exploit
> to expand the network.
> 
Another option is to create separate ORGs for each colo and get
an allocation for each ORG.

Owen


-- 
If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20060302/03a7d803/attachment.sig>