Where to buy Internet IP addresses

Paul Timmins paul at telcodata.us
Tue May 5 15:22:04 CDT 2009

Sorry for the top post, but as a crazy thought here, why not throw out 
an RA, and if answered, go into transparent bridge mode? Let the 
sophisticated users who want routed behavior override it manually.

Jack Bates wrote:
> Joe Greco wrote:
>> Now, the question is, if you're sending all these prefix requests up to
>> the ISP's router, why is *that* device able to cope with it, and why is
>> the CPE device *not* able to cope with it?
> The CPE cannot cope with it due to lack of a chaining standard and the 
> lack of customer understanding of configuring a router. An ISP, as 
> currently designed will manually assign prefix lengths and how they 
> are handed out at each layer of the network. A home user should not be 
> expected to understand this level of complexity. A CPE would have to 
> be told HOW to divide it's variably received prefix to assign it's own 
> networks and then issue prefixes to other routers behind it.
> What is missing, unless I've missed a protocol (which is always 
> possible), is an automated way for a CPE to assign it's networks, pass 
> other networks out to downstream routers in an on-need basis. I say 
> on-need, as there may be 3 routers directly behind the CPE and each of 
> those may get additional routers and so on and so forth. A presumption 
> could be made that route efficiency is not necessary at this level. 
> ie, would it be practical or expected that an automatically configured 
> network support > 100 routes or whatever a CPE can normally handle?
> Of course, if this support is built at a CPE level, there's no reason 
> the protocol can't be extended and supported at the ISP level as well 
> for those who wish to utilize it. An ISP, would of course prefer 
> prefix aggregation and controls to set minimum and maximum aggregate 
> space for a customer.
>> You have an ISP network, with a large amount of space available, and a
>> lesser amount of space dedicated to the POP.
> This setup in the ISP network is handled by hopefully clueful 
> engineers and probably not automatically assigned by some cool 
> protocol that routers speak (which would be cool, though, even if 
> impractical).
>> So what we want is something that can intelligently handle delegation
>> in an automatic fashion, which probably includes configurable settings
>> to request/register delegations upstream, and to accept/manage them
>> downstream.  There's no reason that this shouldn't be basic router
>> capabilities.
> For the home router, I believe that this is mandatory if we wish to 
> continue to allow self configuring networks for home users. A little 
> extended logic and it can also be useful in larger networks, possibly 
> even to the point of an enterprise network able to completely number 
> itself (including renumbering itself as necessary).
> Jack

More information about the NANOG mailing list