[ppml] Restrictions on transferor deaggregation in 2008-2: IPv4Transfer Policy Proposal

[William Herrin]

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 1:18 PM, Kevin - Your.Org <kevin at your.org> wrote:
>  Renter: "I would like to rent a /20."
>  ISP: "Okay, can you document and justify it?"
>  Renter: "Sure, here's my paperwork and network diagrams of how I plan
>  to use this space."
>  ISP: "Great, That will be $x/month."

Hi Kevin,

We talked about this last year. You might be interested in
http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/ppml/2007-July/008275.html


>  For the record, I'm not saying I *support* doing this, and have
>  absolutely no plans to attempt this from either side. Just that I
>  don't see why it's not possible now.

It is possible now. It's just not economically practical. In a
post-exhaustion it could quickly become economically practical.

The solution might be an operations-level thing with minor support
from the RIRs: NRO could offer some kind of feed (perhaps via BGP) of
allocated and assigned CIDR blocks. Operators would then be able to
filter their BGP neighbors' announcements by discarding those which do
not conform.

That has other problems (severe ones) but if exhaustion induces a
table explosion there may not be many alternatives.

Regards,
Bill Herrin



-- 
William D. Herrin herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004