Yes, I know, but I don't see any technical problems in doing this, and if the alternative is that the customer chooses another provider, then I would think that a lot of ISPs would accept. I think this is a better way than assigning a PI net which will only be used until the customer can justify the /21, I know there is some administrative tasks in doing it this way, but if the customer is willingly to pay an administrative fee I don't see the problem. Med venlig hilsen/Best regards Christian Rasmussen Hosting manager, jay.net a/s Smedeland 32, 2600 Glostrup, Denmark Email: noc@jay.net Personal email: chr@corp.jay.net Tlf./Phone: +45 3336 6300, Fax: +45 3336 6301 Produkter / Products: http://hosting.jay.net
-----Original Message----- From: Sabri Berisha [mailto:sabri@cluecentral.net] Sent: 11. august 2003 13:55 To: Christian Rasmussen Cc: Gert Doering; Joao Damas; Address Policy WG Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Summary of the PI Task Force's recent discussions
On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 01:43:15PM +0200, Christian Rasmussen wrote:
Marcus Ruchti says that the majority of the ISPs will not announce PA space from another AS, does this include more specific announcements? If the community does not allow this, whats the point of this:
You will need both parties. The first ISP to add a route-object, and the second to be willing to announce.
-- Sabri Berisha "I route, therefore you are"
user-specific rbl checking? http://sourceforge.net/projects/rblcheckd