<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Changed the subject because this applies to any transfer policy.</div><div><br></div><div>I have been looking for justification of a managed market specifically based on the need to preserve (somewhat) the hierarchy of addresses within the global route table. If arbitrary transfers would significantly scramble the routing tables, that would seem to justify undertaking the challenge of operating a market maker. In such an approach, asks and bids would be cleared so that the particular address block allocated would better fit the routing hierarchy than random (uncoordinated) allocations. Setting up such a market maker is not a trivial undertaking, and would concentrate questions about fairness on the market operator, rather than distributing them among the parties involved in transfers.</div><div><br></div><div>What I have heard is that the fragmentation of global routing due to traffic engineering and multihoming has already scrambled things enough that random transfers is not likely to make much difference. It has been pointed out that transfers are likely to only gradually add to the complexity of the global route table, not cause a sharp spike.</div><div><br></div><div>In the context of similar discussion in RIPE, it seems that an impact on the global route table is not expected.</div><div><a href="http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2007-08.html">http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2007-08.html</a></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; "> "the RIPE NCC does not anticipate that any significant impact will be caused if this proposal is implemented"</span></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Arial" size="3"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;">Is there enough difference between ARIN addresses and RIPE addresses to think the conclusion for ARIN would be different?</span></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Arial" size="3"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><br></span></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Arial" size="3"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;">Does somebody have experimental analysis that indicates a numerical estimate of how many random transfers would produce how much fragmentation (extra entries) in the global route table for ARIN addresses?</span></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Arial" size="3"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><br></span></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Arial" size="3"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;">John</span></font></div><br><div><div>On 2008Oct6, at 10:25 AM, Tom Vest wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>... To recap from last week, what makes routing keep <br>working under the current paradigm?<br><br>1. CIDR -- which provides the basic tools.<br>2. Top-level aggregation -- which the RIR community-system provided, <br>and kept flexible over time as technology improved and RIR community <br>practices changed.<br>3. Filtering -- which was/is only commercially feasible because of the <br>top-level aggregation made possible by the RIR community-system.<br>4. Open entry for new routing service providers, which the arms-length <br>RIR processes also enabled, and which effectively made aggregation and <br>filtering "justifiable" and thus palatable to most direct <br>stakeholders, as well as to the few indirect stakeholders/outside <br>observer who knew that the system existed and understood the basics of <br>how it worked.<br><br>An uncoordinated market will eliminate (2), which will make (3,4) <br>impossible, which will cause the current routing paradigm to fail in <br>short order.<br><br>Maybe a routing cartel will emerge in time to solve the problem, <br>without creating new problems for aspiring new entrants and the ever <br>widening audience of attentive external stakeholders. But that's a big <br>leap of faith...<br><br>TV<br></div></blockquote></div><br></body></html>