Re: Resolving geo discussions

["J. Noel Chiappa" <jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu>]

    > From: Brian E Carpenter <brian@hursley.ibm.com>

    > There's no doubt that if you can persuade all the upstream ISPs to do
    > the right thing, and persuade all the local downstream ISPs to do the
    > right thing, the IX-based addressing model can help a lot (and can
    > simply use PA space as if it was PI). But I don't think the economic
    > forces involved will exercise the required persuasion.

As an aside, and also in tune with your comment, people might want to note
that getting addresses from a local exchange (what I used to call a
"cooperative exchange point") has a big advantage, which is that you're not
tied to a single supplier; i.e. it's effectively number portability, as the
exchange can switch members in the set of carriers providing service without
anyone renumbering.

Of course, if you decide you're unhappy with the exchange, and want to leave,
then you are stuck! :-)

Also, this may lead ISP's to decide that they'd rather not support exchanges,
since the customers are less locked-in (q.v. your comments about economic
forces)! However, I'd imagine that if the exchange is big enough, and there
are enough competing carriers, some carrier(s) will decide they'd rather have
less-locked-in business, than no business at all. After all, plenty of markets
operate without this level of lock-in.

	Noel