Re: NANOG/IEPG/ISOC's current role

[Paul Ferguson <pferguso () cisco com>]

At 07:30 PM 4/2/96 -0800, Michael Dillon wrote:

> > > 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?

I'm not sure this is practical.

In any event, this why people have been bitching about people punching holes
in large CIDR blocks.

- paul