Last Resort Registries

> >So dropping the last resort registries does little or nothing to reduce
> >non-provider addresses, since organisations can still acquire address space
> >from one provider and connectivity from another. The allocation of addresses
> >that may not be aggregateable continues, only now by different registries.
> 
> Nope. A provider should not route address space coming from another
> provider, or even coming from a LR registry.

I have no major problems with that in general, though it does need to be 
modified to permit dual-homed connections

My complaint is that dropping the last resort registries doesn't achieve 
that on its own. Nothing improves if all you do is drop the LR registries
(other than that we get fewer calls from complete idiots :-)).

A coordinated program of discontinuing non-provider registries globally,
and discouraging provider registries from allocating numbers to 
organisations who are unlikely to become their customers, makes more sense.
Without this coordination and widened scope, dropping the LR registries
within Europe merely obscures the problem, rather than fixes it: we still
have non-provider allocations being made, only now by the Internic and by
provider registries.

Kevin Hoadley, JIPS NOSC.