> and I don't know why an ISP would accept advertisements for GUPIs from > its peers unless it was paid (well) to do so.
The key part of enforcement is indeed the community effect. If the community agreement is that GUPIs should not be routed over the Internet, we will get a situation were GUPIs are automatically rejected by 90% of the ISP, through a combination of black-hole routes and BGP filtering. If we get there, then no amount of pressure on individual ISP can compromise the global routing tables. What I perceived in the previous discussion was an unwillingness to do this, because is would ban Internet wide routing of the GUPI forever. There are some who seem to be willing to use GUPI to sneak PI routing in IPv6. I believe we should really not go there, and state clearly that PI addressing will be the result of the MULTI6 work (perhaps), not an evolution of the GUPI. -- Christian Huitema -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
