Let's just go around in circles, shall we?
At 02:34 PM 2/3/97 -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:
>> It is my opinion that if an entity wants a prefix (for the sake of
>> this discussion) longer than a /19 which they can safely assume will
>> be routable in the commodity Internet, they should obtain it from
>> their upstream provider.
>That's fine and dandy, unless you also want to multihome. If you're
>a group (a company for instance) that wants to be *really* available
>All The Time, what do you do?
Dare I say it -- pay for transit. You are never going to reach
concensus on how to handle this issue, but by the same token,
you can't force any particular service provider to carry a
longer prefix if you are not already paying them for service.
This gets back into the whole discussion on whether an economic
model for route advertisements is feasible, but not an applicable
discussion topic for this list.
ps. Can you please reconfigure your mailer *not* to attach the
mail headers as attachments? Thanks.