[lir-wg] Discussion about RIPE-261

Nils Ketelsen wrote:
> 
> On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 08:06:32AM +0200, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
> 
> > > The *benefit* of "/48 multihoming" is that you can filter those routes
> > > if you don't want to see them - then your routers will send packets
> > > down the /32 road, and eventually hit a router that knows about the /48
> > > (which is why I consider this approach superior to "everybody gets a
> > > independent prefix", which I can't properly aggregate).  Which brings
> > > us back to "why I want ONE regional block per RIR" - that's why.
> > Yup.
> 
> Gert pointed me to this list and I lurked for a while now. But now I want to
> take my chance and say something about this: I'm on the customers side (not
> being a LIR, but rather seing it from the other perspective).
> 
> We currently have our internetaccess at one provider and are quite happy
> with this most of the time. The only problem is the disaterous commercial
> situation of some providers. This forced us to change providers a few times
> now and we are just currently thinking of implementing multihoming. Not
> because its a better technical solution (this is a nice sideeffect, but not
> the main reason), but rather to be indepent from the next bankrupt.
> 
> This is exactly what mutihoming with PA Address Space will not solve. Though
> I see the technical advantages Gert pointed out (especially bein reachable
> from an AS filtering small netblocks, this does not provide any solution to
> the commercial challenges providers are currently facing.
> 
> So, what we really want is PI addresses. And with the current pratices they
> just do not aggregate which also is a bad thing. This is why I think the
> geographical approach already mentioned on the list (one netblock per
> country, different sizes depending on population) currently is the approach
> which fits that need best, I believe.

How do you come to that conclusion? Every other PI space will be with
another ISP. So even thought you might have everything close together
on a "human logic" level there is no way to aggregate the prefixes
together in the routing system. Unless of course you want to do it
PTT style where one is the one who routes this block.

Other than your last paragraph I fully agree on what you describe.
Unless there is a convincing way for this independence IPv6 won't
fly.

-- 
Andre