Miguel,
On Jan 25, 8:20, Sean Doran wrote:
Subject: Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations
...
Note that we make /19 allocations even though one particular ISP is telling the world that /18 is the minimum you ought to have these days.
Yup. And when you make the /19 allocations, you should tell them that in 195/8, if they are announcing a /19, a /20, a /21, a /22, a /23 or a /24, that will not work if they want to talk to SprintLink via a non-customer path.
It's the other way round: SPRINT should tell his customers he can't guarantee 100% global Internet connectivity because he disagrees with the current address allocation policy of the IANA/InterNIC/RIPE NCC/AP-NIC.
Would you assume that anyone whose address allocation follow "the current address allocation policy of the IANA/InterNIC/RIPE NCC/AP-NIC" is guaranteed 100% global Internet connectivity ? Yakov.