Re: NANOG/IEPG/ISOC's current role

[Michael Dillon <michael () memra com>]

On Tue, 2 Apr 1996, Paul Ferguson wrote:

> At 04:26 PM 4/2/96 -0800, Michael Dillon wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2 Apr 1996, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
> >
> > > If the providers were to relax the requirements to renumber when
> > > moving to another provider or when dual homing, the problem of the 
> > > TWD would not be growing at its current rate.
> >
> > Hmmm.... ISP has T1 to SPRINT, wants to switch to MCI, SPRINT says, OK
> > you have a choice, either renumber or pay us to route your traffic to MCI 
> > via a private exchange point so we don't have to knock holes in our 
> > aggregate. That way you can use SPRINT's addresses and MCI's T1, but for 
> > a fee.
>
>
> And the global routing table grows.

If this is done with a private two-party exchange point, then can't it 
also be done without any change in the global routing table?

Michael Dillon                                    Voice: +1-604-546-8022
Memra Software Inc.                                 Fax: +1-604-546-3049
http://www.memra.com                             E-mail: michael () memra com