[ppml] "Can someone solve this mystery...?"

[Jim Fleming]

"Can someone solve this mystery...?"

1. Your assumptions may not be correct.

2. Engineering does not have to be a mystery. You can look at the code and connect machines and see what they do.

3. Anyone can "announce" anything to anyone. Do you think a reliable core IPv4 transport needs to listen to announcements ?

4. The "routing table size" is a totally bogus argument. It is promoted by the BGP/FUD people, who profit from gaming the system.

======

Place yourself inside of a router (forwarder) in the reliable core transport. A packet arrives, you inspect certain bits in the
160-bit header

and you decide whether it is for yourself or one of the other members of the reliable core transport. If you inspect only 8 bits
then, you

might have (at most) 256 places to forward the packet. Is that a large router table ? 256 entries...??...

NOTE WELL....I did not say WHICH 8 bits are inspected...one bit inspected could be the SNOOPY bit...

128-bit DNS AAAA Record Flag Day Formats
2002:[IPv4]:[SDLL.OFFF.FFFF.TTTT]:[64-bit IPv8 or IPv16 Persistent Address]
[YMDD]:[IPv4]:[SDLL.OFFF.FFFF.TTTT]:[64-bit IPv8 or IPv16 Persistent Address]
1-bit to set the Reserved/Spare ("SNOOPY") bit in Fragment Offset [S]
1-bit to set the Don't Fragment (DF) bit [D]
2-bits to select 1 of 4 common TTL values (255, 128, 32, 8) [LL]
1-bit for Options Control [O]
7-bits to set the Identification Field(dst) [FFFFFFF]
4-bits to set the TOS(dst) Field [TTTT]
Default SDLL.OFFF.FFFF.TTTT = 0000.0000.0000.0000
FFF.FFFF.TTTT = GGG.SSSS.SSSS
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt



----- Original Message -----
From: "Mailing List" <mailinglist at comentum.com>
To: <ppml at arin.net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 10:38 PM
Subject: Re: [ppml] ARIN Policy Proposal 2002-9


> Can someone solve this mystery:
>
> If an organization is getting connections from two or more ISPs
> (Multihomed), the organization will receive am ASN and a /24 IP address from
> one of its ISPs, then, that organization and its ISPs will announce that /24
> to the Internet.
>
> This will add an entry to the global routing table in the same way as if
> that organization received and announced its /24 IP space from ARIN.
>
> In the above situation (multihomed network), ARIN's argument of not
> assigning /24 for the reason of an increase in the global routing table does
> not make sense. Whether that organization received its /24 from one of its
> ISPs or from ARIN, in both cases the /24 will be announced and added to the
> global routing table.
>
> What is the excuse of ARIN not assigning /24 to multihomed networks?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bernard Kohan
> Comentum Corp.
> Tel 858/410-0700
> Fax 858/410-0707
> www.comentum.com
> support at comentum.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alec H. Peterson" <ahp at hilander.com>
> To: <ppml at arin.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 11:44 AM
> Subject: RE: [ppml] ARIN Policy Proposal 2002-9
>
>
> > --On Tuesday, October 1, 2002 14:19 -0400 Beran <beran at beranpeter.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Equal access to ip space is VERY important to the Internet community at
> > > large. This should be a TOP priority!
> >
> > There are other priorities at work.  If ARIN allocates a /24 to anybody
> who
> > asks for one, there will be a massive land grab.  The supply we have now
> > will seem even smaller than it is now, and routing table size will get
> > completely out of control.
> >
> > >
> > > It is clear now that we have had a number of years of operation in the
> > > current format to understand that IP space is still being improperly
> > > utilized/horded/charged for etc.
> > > Why not allow /24 address space allocations?
> >
> > I don't quite follow how relaxing our allocation policy will change the
> > issues you percieve with hoarding and utilization.
> >
> > > I see and have heard NO good reasons not to allow it. The same process
> and
> > > the same requirements for a /20 address space works well now so why not
> > > for /24.
> >
> > For exactly the same reasons that the InterNIC decided to only allocate
> /19
> > and shorter blocks in the mid 90s.  Because address space is a very
> limited
> > resource.  I encourage you to look at the discussions on the PAGAN, CIDRD
> > and NANOG lists that took place when these policies were first introduced.
> > Back then, at the rate of consumption that we saw address space was not
> > going to last more than a few more years.
> >
> > There are many more things that we need to consider.  The fact that some
> > small businesses claim they are being gouged by their service providers is
> > unfortunate, but it is not an issue that ARIN can or should address.  In
> > the mid 90s there were extremely good reasons to put restrictions on who
> > can get address space.  Having ARIN only allocate large blocks of address
> > space (/20) accomplishes a lot.  Even though multi-homed customers are
> > sometimes announcing their PA space as a more specific, that address space
> > is still aggregatable.  So a service provider can make a decision to only
> > accept /20 and shorter announcements in ARIN-allocated address space and
> > can still reach the entire Internet.  Were ARIN to begin allocating /24s
> > this would no longer be possible.
> >
> > > ARIN IS doing a good job. Great people, great service, and responsive.
> > > ISP's on average have not been any of these. And to charge EVERY month
> for
> > > EVERY ip used which was essentially free to obtain for anyone to justify
> a
> > > couple years ago is terrible.
> >
> > If you are unhappy with what your service provider is charging you, I
> > suggest you complain to your service provider or find a new one.  Service
> > providers have real costs associated with the services that they provide.
> > How they charge for them is their business, and if they charge too much
> > then open market forces will correct it.  Do you complain to your
> > provider's upstream provider when they charge you too much for the
> > bandwidth you are purchasing?  Do you complain to the VeriSign Registry
> > when your registrar charges you too much for a domain name?
> >
> > Alec
> >
> > --
> > Alec H. Peterson -- ahp at hilander.com
> > Chief Technology Officer
> > Catbird Networks, http://www.catbird.com
>