North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations

  • From: George Herbert
  • Date: Mon Jan 29 23:34:42 1996 

> There is at least one very simple response.  Set up some deviant CIX, say
> IX195-8, let everyone with a shortish 195/8 prefix connect to it either
> directly through their own provider, or indirectly through some tunnel, and
> have IX195-8 announce reachability of 195/8.  That is, in short, altern
> topology to meet addresses when the converse is too hard.  KRE detailed
> that for the general case, but it would be even simpler in the case of
> RIPE, since all the allocated network numbers are in the same geographical
> area.

I still think it would be worthwhile doing a top-down experiment with
this sort of address structure around an easily aggregated geographical
area, say the San Francisco Bay Area in northern California.  I brought the
idea up about 6 months ago and it floundered due to disinterest, but it
still seems to be viable.

-george william herbert
[email protected]