[ppml] Provider Independence???
marcelo bagnulo braun
marcelo at it.uc3m.es
Wed Dec 8 13:34:42 EST 2004
El 08/12/2004, a las 16:12, Michael.Dillon at radianz.com escribió:
>> At the end of the day, this means that
>> ISPA will be carrying traffic for some of the customers of ISPB, which
>> i guess lacks of a business case.
> Please remember that we are talking about IPv6 here
> not IPv4. In other words we are talking about a network
> which does not currently exist.
> There is no reason why
> it has to be deployed identically to v4 with just a
> different layer 3 protocol. It will likely be different
> in many ways, depending on what applications it is
> built to support.
> I can envision ISPA operating in 3 regions with
> 4 ASNs, 1 for each region and one for their non-geographic
> network. They would only announce the geo aggregate for
> region 1 using their region 1 AS. This means that they
> will only be carrying some of ISPBs traffic if that traffic
> is destined to region 1.
> Since both ISPs operate in region 1
> they will have some sort of peering agreement at region 1
> exchange points.
i agree to assume this for the sake of this discussion (in real life i
guess that there is nothing imposing this, so this may not be the case
and the aggregation would break (which is the other problem of geo
addressing (topology may not match geography, hence hindering
aggregation), but let's focus on one problem at the time, especially
because imho the problem with the business case is more relevant.
> Otherwise the traffic would never get to
> it's destination in ISPB's network and ISPA would also
> lose traffic that comes in on ISPB's regional links.
> So the business case is clear, as it was back in the
> early 90's. Everybody needs to carry competitor's
> traffic in order to create the "network effect" which
> makes the network valuable to customers. And any
> imbalances are worked out in peering and transit agreements.
but what happens if a ISP don't want to accept the peering conditions
of the other ISPs in the region, what happens then?
i don't know, but i would like to hear some feedback about this
business case from some isps, just to see if this make sense to them.
> In fact, I think the real leaders in this will
> not be the ISPs but the exchange points, especially
> the larger operations like Equinix. If geo addressing
> is accepted in v6, then this allows for the v6 network
> to be built as a network of exchange points. I believe
> that this will provide better resiliency and seperacy
> than v6 networks and that, in the end, will drive the
> mass migration to v6 networks.
> --Michael Dillon
More information about the ARIN-PPML