> The problem is that the local ISP has every motivation to take the money > with no substantial costs, because those appear at the aggregating > transit providers upstream. While it sounds nice to say we will > legislate against that, reality is that it will happen, so the only > reasonable defense is to provide an alternative that scales.
Your conclusion doesn't follow. If upstream providers don't already have a mechanism to filter out bogus route advertisements, surely it can be developed - particularly when the bogus prefixes are easily identified. I'd be happy to see a scalable alternative to provider-based addressing, but that's not a good argument against SLs with site-ids. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
