[ppml] RIR Shopping, Table Growth x5?

[Michael K. Smith - Adhost]

> Subject: Re: [ppml] RIR Shopping, Table Growth x5?
> 
> Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
> >> In a message written on Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 04:26:29PM +0100,
> Jeroen
> >> Massar wrote:
> >>> * = though, for instance (!random example grabbing!) UUNET/MCI has
> >>> already received about 8 /32's for different purposes globally.
The
> >>> space is easily justified by them and each /32 only covers a
> > country,
> >>> but I would not be surprised that they did this simply because of
> > the
> >>> above described problem: keeping traffic local.
> >> I guess that's the question though.  If a company can get 8 /32's
> >> around the world, should our allocation policies somehow allow them
> to
> >> get a /29 they can subdivide into /32's from a single RIR, and then
> >> nothing from others?  That preserves the ability to aggregate,
while
> >> the current scheme of getting them from multiple RIR's at different
> >> times does not.
> >>
> >
> > Wouldn't that require all traffic to be routed via the connection(s)
> in
> > the geographic region of the assigning RIR?  That seems like a
fairly
> > drastic limitation to connectivity for the sake of route
aggregation.
> I
> > would think geographic aggregation regardless of where the company
> above
> > has its offices would make more sense.  So, their Chinese office
> would
> > aggregate into the "Chinese Block" and the US office would be
> aggregated
> > into the "US Block" and so on.
> 
> There is no topological agreation of PI space geographically. I don't
> get together with the other isps in my rir region and collectively
> announce my address space... that would fundamentally alter how people
> buy transit.
> 

Understood.  I was thinking more in terms of RIR blocks from which I
would assume (with all that implies) there is some natural geographic
aggregation that occurs.

Regards,

Mike