[ppml] 2005-1:Business Need for PI Assignments

Tom Vest tvest at pch.net
Thu Apr 28 07:57:27 EDT 2005

On Apr 28, 2005, at 1:36 PM, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

> Michael.Dillon at radianz.com said:
>> In the end, I think that strict geographic allocations which
>> follow the topology of the network, are the only workable solution.
> Make up your mind -- do you want strict geographic allocations or do 
> you
> want addressing that follows topology?  Those are only the same thing 
> for
> very simple end user scenarios.
> Real world example: picture an enterprise with 40,000 sites in the US.
> Should each of those sites be numbered from the local state/city pool?
> Should they be numbered from the nearest public Internet connection?  
> What
> if a site in MT is connected to the Internet via four same-company 
> hubs in
> LA, NY, Hong Kong, and Brussels?  Please explain how _any_ addressing
> model other than PI makes sense.
>> Since we do have the space available to do geographic addressing
>> by using another 1/8th of the IPv6 address space, why are we not
>> seriously pursuing this avenue? I know that geopolitical addressing
>> is sexier, i.e. the same old, same old, but if we had some serious
>> work being done on geographical addressing that would be sufficient
>> to push the geopolitical ideas to the bottom of the agenda.
> The reason it's not being pursued is that (a) the topology does not 
> follow
> geography today and (b) providers have motivation to make it so.
> It'd make for a nice Ph.D. thesis though.
> S

I categorically disagree.

It would make for a terrible Ph.D. thesis.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list