Hi, On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 03:34:58PM +0000, Max Tulyev wrote:
In this case, at first you are going to kill a small and extra-small business (I believe, it is *only* real target for those who speaks againist PI - to simplify competition for themselves) as well as non-commertial and educational requesters.
While this is a nice argument, I don't really see why I am supposed to sponsor these entities. If they think they need to put a burden on global routing, they can pay for it - and if they think that's too expensive, they can use PA space, and renumber every now and then. Nobody is aiming to exclude people from participating in the Internet, but PI isn't the *only* way.
Second, "PI vs LIR" deal. If one real wants own IP/AS, and ready to pay for it, this one WILL add a prefix to the global routing table, either he become a LIR or only get PI. BUT. If costs are equal, EVERY manager (who make final decision for what to pay) will take MORE "something" (IP addresses in this case) for same (or near) price. And no technician can argue with that. So instead of PI /24 they really need, they get a LIR with at least /21 they really don't need in any case. And we loose in conservation of address space in 8 times (not winning in aggregation any percent)!!!
Actually, I see this as a win - as soon as the /24 is full, we have a second entry in the routing table (for the next PI), while with a /21, the single routing table entry will last a lot longer. This is what is happening right now - people get multiple PI assignments, instead of a single larger block. (Besides this, nobody said that the price would have to be the *same* - I specifically mentioned the "extra small" LIR category) Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 94488 SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 D- 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-234