[ppml] Address Space versus Routing Slots

On Mon, 8 May 2006, Vince Fuller wrote:
>> If no, please support 2005-1. It sucks, but all the other alternatives
>> are worse.
>
> I won't support a proposal that is fundamentally wrong. Perhaps if or
> when the pain gets bad enough, there will be more impetus to solve the
> multihoming problem for real.

Vince has said it very well here and in other posts.

Let me put in my two observations,

  - If the goal is to make PI available to pretty much everyone with 
zero or very little cost, the only even half-reasonable approach seems 
to be geographical allocation, with all of its warts and issues.  At 
least that gives some hope of serious aggregation down the road, and 
if aggregated, minimizes sites' TE abuse of DFZ.

  - If the goal is to make PI available to O(1000) [or fewer] sites 
defined using some reasonable metric and with an annual fee, with a 
requirement (like with LIRs today) that the prefix be advertised with 
a single aggregated advertisement, the damage to the DFZ might be 
restricted enough.  But I'm not sure whether such policy would be 
worth the effort, as it appears that many such sites have been getting 
aboard as LIRs and have obtained PA space..

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings