[arin-ppml] Using fees to encourage route aggregation

[Alex Ryu]

I understand that part. 
ARIN's allocation is basically affecting routing world. 

But charging additional fee for route aggregation effectiveness is operational part, which is not the task ARIN is doing now. 
That's what I'm talking.
Setting minimum allocation for ISP and end users is done by ARIN. 
But breaking it down for customers and have some filtering to limit the routing table size is more for ISP operation. 
So it is not part of ARIN's task. 
It is more of best common practice, I believe. 


Alex


-----Original Message-----
From: wherrin at gmail.com [mailto:wherrin at gmail.com] On Behalf Of William Herrin
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 1:07 PM
To: Alex Ryu
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Using fees to encourage route aggregation

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Alex Ryu <alex.ryu at kdlinc.com> wrote:
> One of ARIN's priciple was that ARIN is not responsible for
> routability of IP address allocated.

Alex,

One of ARIN's legal limitations of liability is that it doesn't
guarantee routability of any addresses it allocates. That's not at all
the same thing.

IIRC, Tony Li of IRTF RRG once observed: "Routing is addressing is
routing." If it wasn't Tony I apologize, but whoever authored that
statement captured the long and short of it. What's *possible* in the
routing system follows from how the addresses are allocated and how
the addresses are allocated follows from what's needed in the routing
system.

ARIN's liability for what 3rd parties do with the addresses notwithstanding.

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