[ppml] Policy Proposal 2002-3: Micro-Assignments forMultihome d Networks

[jlewis at lewis.org]

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003, Leo Bicknell wrote:

> No, I would argue we should go right to /24 now, let the industry deal
> with whatever problems come up, and in two years look at how we did.

Supporting this (IMO) is http://www.arin.net/policy/2001_2.html

Multihoming is already justification for an ISP to assign a /24 to a 
customer.  Therefore, multihomed networks already can get /24's from one 
of their providers and announce them via BGP into the global routing 
table.  With the exception of any networks still filtering on RIR 
allocation boundaries, everyone is already seeing these /24 routes.  Why 
not let these networks get their /24's directly from ARIN and give them 
the flexibility and peace of mind that they won't have to renumber if they 
choose to leave that provider, if that provider goes bankrupt, or if that 
provider decides to stop doing business in their area?  It seems to me 
this should cause no impact on the global routing table size.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Jon Lewis *jlewis at lewis.org*|  I route
 System Administrator        |  therefore you are
 Atlantic Net                |  
_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________