Jeffrey A. Williams wrote:
Yes and a not so good policy.
An excellent policy, actually. Most "excellent" policies are formulates before greed and commercial interests get a hold; See US Declaration of Independence, early RIPE policies and most RFCs before the IETF happened.
Peters discription is however not complete, as we now know, and as many have contended sence day 1, was never intended as he discribes it.
Er, actually in this context it is and was and hopefully will be. I think I was hanging around in the background when many of these were formulated; not contributing, but drinking the coffee at least. As Michael says the "public" Internet is not completely what the original RFC authors had in mind.
Exactly right and therefore presupposes that private PI or PA space wheather public or not are in any routing scheme may or may not reflect the public internet routing policy which is just a fact of the real world.
Not that simple and probably not true. You are conflating routing between networks (internetworking) and this supposed public infrastructure where a large proportion of the address space is visible in some form. They are not the same and how will you decide who's policy viewpoint is the right one ? Let me guess, a network with a routing policy and a viewpoint you agree with ? Peter