BCP for multisite multihoming

[Carlos Garcia Braschi]

2007/5/23, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>:
> On 2007-05-23 03:28, Sascha Lenz wrote:
> ...
> > ...even with arguments, you most likely won't get the people who DO
> > filter on RIR boundaries to lower them.
> > Just not possible, they are stubborn and not open to arguments ;-)
>
> They are open to arguments accompanied by large amounts of money,
> This is a business issue, not a technical or religious issue.
> When there are financial incentives to relax the filters, it will
> happen.
>
> BTW the same is true of geographic addressing - as Iljitsch
> says, it isn't hard technically. What has been lacking for the
> last 15 years is a financial incentive.
>

I'm not sure if this has been proposed already, but what if we did
geographic addressing but assigned the addresses to
interconnect/peering points? (requiring that they be used to cover the
region the IX is in, and that among all the peering partners manage to
exchange locally the un-aggregated routing tables).

Those would act as LIR / RIR for all ISPs connected to them and would
have incentive to promote the idea... as it promotes fidelity of their
peering customers and gives them more service.

It also allows the model to be applied in a more step-by-step fashion
(there is no need to agree on that model worldwide).

Any IX listening would like the idea?

>     Brian
>
>