Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations

[George Herbert <gherbert () crl com>]

> > Backbone, Scott.  Backbone.  You, Sprint, PSI, Alternet,
> > Net-99, etc.  All the rest of the world's providers are getting
> > transit from some backbone.  If all the transit backbones are in the 
> > area the problem is merely political.
>
> They aren't... ICM, Pipex, and Dante to name three.  Sprintlink
> may play nice and handle ICM, what do you plan to do to address the
> others?

How do Pipex and Dante get global routes right now?

> And for the next trick, how do you scale your solution to the next
> site?  Does your solution require sites of all the backbone providers
> to be at each metropolitan exchange?  Doesn't this put a limit
> in the number of providers that can do this?   

More likely, it limits the number of areas you can apply this
idea cleanly to.  Poorly-connected areas won't get such blocks.
The more backbones in an area, the easier (technically and politically)
to put such a block there.  The question is how much you get out
of the areas we can do this to... which could be quite a lot.
Just the SF Bay Area is a large chunk of the Internet as a whole...
it won't be forever, but it is now and its growth patterns could
positively or negatively shape how other areas grow later.

-george