Reject the NAIPR

[Stephen Satchell]

At 4:50 PM 1/18/97, Paul Ferguson wrote:
>   In order for the Internet to scale using existing technologies, use
>   of regional registry services should be limited to the assignment of
>   IP addresses for organizations meeting one or more of the following
>   conditions:
>
>      a)  the organization has no intention of connecting to
>          the Internet-either now or in the future-but it still
>          requires a globally unique IP address.  The organization
>          should consider using reserved addresses from RFC1918.
>          If it is determined this is not possible, they can be
>          issued unique (if not Internet routable) IP addresses.
>
>      b)  the organization is multi-homed with no favored connection.
>
>      c)  the organization's actual requirement for IP space is
>          very large, for example, the network prefix required to
>          cover the request is of length /18 or shorter.
>
>   All other requestors should contact its ISP for address space or
>   utilize the addresses reserved for non-connected networks described
>   in RFC1918 until an Internet connection is established.  Note that
>   addresses issued directly from the IRs,(non-provider based), are the
>   least likely to be routable across the Internet.

I suggest there is another rationale:

     d)  The organization desires links to different backbone providers
(either directly or via ISPs) in order to bridge local outages on any given
specific backbone provider.  This would be particularly true for those
organizations with mission-critical use of the Internet and wanting to
bridge any failure, including failure of any given backbone.

---
Stephen Satchell, Satchell Evaluations
<http://www.accutek.com/~satchell> for contact and other info