North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Routing wars pending?
> Alan Hannan <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > > What are the correlations and contrasts between our current > backbone routing problems (wrt space and # of routes) and the FCC > decision several years ago to make 1-800 numbers portable. Correlations are manifold. The most striking contrasts: - Implementation on the 1-800 numbers was straightforward - number space quite small - routing fairly centralised - on the level of the 1-800 address space there is quite static routing, I understand that database updates at that time were done by shipping magtapes - The problem was local to one country and jurisdiction due to the addressing hierarchy > I ask because I see the a potential scenario when we are forced to > play hardball wrt non portability of new CIDR routes. Imagine > this... Big corporation leaves us having been allocated /21 of > address space. We tell them to get new IP numbers from their provider > and backbone smart people make it known they won't propogate > routes (you wouldn't, right Sean?). They say get stuffed, and get > a congress person to propose a bill that all IP numbers are > portable. This bill passes. They also passed a bill once to make PI 3 or some such, didn't they? Daniel