Re: PI vs PA Address Space
- Date: Wed, 17 May 1995 09:21:25 -0700
- Posted-date: Wed, 17 May 1995 09:21:25 -0700
Daniel,
I like what you have done with this document. I believe what we need
to get the market drive to force behavior we want (global routability)
our backbone service providers should charge us for routing an individual
net number. An individual net number is a classful net number or
a CIDR block. This should be a yearly charge. The regional service providers
would then pass this cost on to their customers. In the case of CIDR blocks
the charge would be proportionally smaller. The regionals shouldn't be
the driving force for this charging because the problem associated with
PI routes doesn't affect all of the regionals the same way. There are
regionals which still use default routing toward the backbone and do not
carry full routing tables.
I can't decide if we want class B's to be charged more than class C's. Us
old timers with lots of class B's wouldn't like that. It would however
encourage folks with class A's and B's that are inefficiently assigning
address space to turn back expensive to keep network numbers.
While I think that our backbone providers should charge us for individual
routes, I do not want them to use this as a form of revenue enhancement
but instead as a form of social reengineering encouraging good behavior.
So the charge should be offset with a decrease in the basic charge rate.
There is one problem with this scheme. In order to charge enough to
cause behavior changes the backbones would have to charge a lot for
individual routes. The cost for internet access is quite high right now
so a charge of say $100/year would be a drop in the bucket compared to the
other costs. So the market drive to use PA address space would be small.
It would however have a effect on the dial-in customers who are connecting
the cheapest way possible.
Just my $.02 worth.
Walt
