[ppml] Draft 2 of proposal for ip assignment with sponsorship
forrest at almighty.c64.org
Fri Feb 28 10:03:42 EST 2003
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Alec H. Peterson wrote:
> --On Friday, February 28, 2003 8:53 AM -0600 Forrest
> <forrest at almighty.c64.org> wrote:
> > If every backbone network filtered out my multihomed /24, how exactly
> > would this only be a reduced benefit to my multihoming? This would be a
> > complete waste of time for me. When packets destined for me hit a
> > defaultless router, where do you think the packet is going to go? Toward
> > the ISP that has the large aggregate, which I have lost connectivity with.
> I know exactly what would happen, and you are exactly right.
> But there is more to the Internet than just you and your company, and the
> attitude that you are only considering your needs and not the needs of the
> rest of the Internet is somewhat disappointing.
So basically what you're saying then is that to "deserve" to be multihomed
and be reatchable, you must be a large company/ISP/whatever. Screw the
little guy, we didn't need to talk to him anyway. Where exactly do you
draw the line? Why not take it a step further and just filter out
everything longer than an /8 in the old Class A space. Hey, who needs to
hear your /16 announcement out of the 188.8.131.52/8 block anyway. AT&T has
the entire /8 so you'll still be reachable. In fact, lets just change the
minimum allocation to /8 and then we'll never have to worry about routing
table growth ever again.
More information about the ARIN-PPML