Keith Moore wrote: > > Problem is, nobody has bought this yet, because these addresses are > > PI, whatever you might call them, and will be misused and leaked to > > the defaultless table one day or the other, especially in > the lack of > > a multihoming solution. > > I don't buy it. If the standards say that ISPs in the public > Internet > are supposed to filter advertisements for global PI addresses, I'm > confident they will get filtered in the vast majority of cases. > > ... > > Of course if individual ISPs want to advertise routes to such > prefixes internally, perhaps because they're paid to do so, > that's their own > business.
You contradict yourself. Michel points out that an unambiguous address space will be leaked, and you end up agreeing that the ISPs will do that when paid. The only way to prevent that case is for the ISP to have the technical barrier of ambiguity to push back on the business side of the house. Tony -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
