Thank you for your feedback. In answer to the 'working together' providers it is not nescessary for them to be working together as you could simply buy co-location. All provider B does is advertise a /19 of address space and route it to provider A's router. Provider A's router could be on the end of a leased line in neutral co-location facilities. We tried to steer away from NAT and policy routing as it makes things complicated. We liked the 'real' address space and many of our customers would demand this. Kind regards Matthew ----- Original Message ----- From: "Corneliu Tanasa" <ctanasa@i-net.ro> To: "Matthew Robinson" <matthew@crescent.org.uk> Cc: <routing-wg@ripe.net> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 2:10 PM Subject: Re: Multihoming without AS

Hi Matthew,

I have a working scenario, which is slightly different than yours by the fact that the customer have a /28 (or /27) from each A and B providers. The customer is running NAT and also is balancing the traffic on both links (policy routing) with floating default route to assure full backup of the links. Having chunks of /24 allocated to each customer, then there is no issue with the bunch of /24 announced, because each provider (ISP) will continue to advertise his /19 or whatever. Also, in your scenario, there is the assumption that provider A and B are not competitors and they'll work together on behalf of the community :-) Kind regards, Corneliu Tanasa