Re: Why did we do CIDR? (RE: Confussion over multi-homing)

[Brad <brad () americanisp net>]

On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Leo Bicknell wrote:

> Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 18:46:31 -0400
> From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell () ufp org>
> To: nanog () merit edu
> Subject: Re: Why did we do CIDR? (RE: Confussion over multi-homing)
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 02:50:07PM -0700, Sean Donelan wrote:
> > If folks are going to deaggregate the addresses and announce multiple routes
> > anyway, why are we going through the pain of ARIN policies.  Wouldn't it be
> > better to allocate the appropriately sized address in the first place?
>
>       Yes, it would.  It would seem ARIN should allocate small blocks on
> a trade-in only policy.  You can get a /24, but when you go to a /23 you
> _will_ renumber, and soforth up to a /19 or so, at which time when you need
> more you get an additional prefix.
>
>       That way you limit it to 1 route per ASN for small players, and
> everyone can multihome.

One route per AS would be nice, however, renumbering every
time additional space is required is just not possible in
some cases.
It seems every time I turn around, I find myself requesting
more address space, and according to ARIN policies,
demand=supply (ie, if you can prove you have a need for it,
you will get it).

> Leo Bicknell - bicknell () ufp org

---
Brad
brad () americanisp net