Re: Portability of 206 address space

[Avi Freedman <freedman () netaxs com>]

> > Hi,
> >
> > Anyone know whether Internic has issued an edict mandating
> > non-portability of provider obtained 206 address space, such
> > as /18's within this block?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mike
>       Please clarify "portable" as used in this context.
>
>       - Routable between different providers
>       - Transferable intoto between ISPs
>       - Transferable subsets
>       - Some other meaning
>
>       No delegation registry can claim any prefix portability if 
>       the first option is the meaning. The second has applicability
>       to various proposals for a prefix market once a delegation
>       has been made. (no Internic involvment)  The third is strictly
>       between ISPs and thier clients and has a lot to do with 
>       prefix migration (nee punching holes in CIDR blocks) and nothing
>       to do with the Internic.  And then there is your possible
>       other meaning...
>
>       For the first three, the Internic has zero sane reason for
>       issuing any "edict" wrt portability. That is strictly an
>       ISP issue.  The fourth... ??? :)
>
>
> --bill

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -