Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Request for Comments on a topological address block for N. Calif.
From: George Herbert <gherbert () crl com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 14:52:35 -0700


This has been brought up before and discussed to no final conclusion.
I am more interested at this point in actually doing something, so I
would like to issue a final-round-of-discussion request for comments
prior to making this happen.

I propose that a large block (say, /8 to /10) be allocated to an independent
authority which will then reallocate growable blocks to small to mid level
ISPs in the northern california region who are connecting via providers
attached to MAE-W, CIX, or PacBell's NAP and topologically "at" those
connect points.  These addresses can then be filtered out of announcements
to routers anywhere else in the world and replaced with a /8 aggregate
announcement; only routers within the topology zone would require full
information on the connected entities.  These addresses will be relatively
easy to dual-home within the area, yet will have minimal impact on the global
routing infrastructure.

To minimize the number of routes announced within the area, all addresses
assigned would be sufficient for 6-month in the future at demonstrated growth
rates, and reservations for up to 18 months in the future at demonstrated
growth rates would be made when possible (giving the inherent ability to
grow /20's to /19s and /18s etc. rather than have to make a new announcement).
A minimum size of /20 would be required for entrance; smaller ISPs would
have to go through traditional allocation-from-their-upstream-provider
channels.  This would tend to make brand new startups avoid cluttering
the space until their growth was established and measured.

Some sort of nominal fee on the order of $1 to $2.50 per /24 equiv
would probably support the operation just fine, which should be
within the range nobody will object to.

Comments, suggestions, pointing out of fatal flaws or anyone stating they
will be completely unwilling to go along with this are solicited (though I
would appreciate an explanation for objections or refusals 8-).
Thank you.

-george william herbert
gherbert () crl com



  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]