Re: Designing an IX with non-PI space peers

  • To: davidc at apnic dot net (David R. Conrad)
  • Subject: Re: Designing an IX with non-PI space peers
  • From: "Miguel A.L. Paraz" <map at iphil dot net>
  • Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 00:43:47 +3200 (HKT)
  • Cc: apops at apnic dot net
  • In-reply-to: <199704290525.OAA26327 at moonsky.jp dot apnic dot net> from "David R. Conrad" at Apr 29, 97 02:25:11 pm
  • Sender: owner-apops@apnic.net
    • Hi,
      
      Thanks to everyone for their inputs...
      
      David R. Conrad wrote:
      > Given that multi-homing is a justification for
      > obtaining portable space and to be multi-homed generally means you
      > need an AS as well as the proliferation of regional IXes, I'd point
      > out that AS numbers are as scarce as IPv4 addresses (yes, that can be
      > taken in multiple ways... :-)).
      
      The local ISPs that we would like to peer BGP with (and some of which
      we are already partially peering with, statically, at the PHIX) are
      already heavily dependent on their upstream space.  It is unlikely that
      they would renumber to portable space.  One has two upstream providers
      but uses provider-dependent space from each.
      
      With this kind of situation, can they allocate an ASN?
      
      > Address allocations should follow network topology.  If the network
      > topology is such that all organizations within the country's Internet
      > can be aggregated together, the concept of allocating addresses on a
      > national basis would make sense.
      
      No, this is not what I meant.  What I thought was to set aside a
      chunk of space for routing only WITHIN the country.  This will be
      for organizations that only need nationwide connectivity, and visibility
      to all ISPs (that peer locally, at least). but not international 
      connectivity.
      
      Think of it like as a nationwide Intranet.  For example of one our
      good Congressmen is pushing a bill that will build a government network
      on top of the existing ISP infrastructure.  Now, each of this agencies
      will choose their own ISP based on a public bidding and other criteria.
      Factor in the condition that different provinces have different ISPs,
      and that the Philippines has around 120 ISPs with 20 IPL-equipped
      providers.
      
      These agencies would want FULL connectivity to each other, and possibly
      to the rest of the countries, but NOT to the world.  Hypothetically
      if we allocate 10/8 for this purpose, each agency can have a /16 from
      this chunk for "country-reachable" hosts, and get a /26 from their
      ISP space for world-reachable hosts, such as web/mail servers, NATs
      and firewalls.
       
      > However such cases are a bit rare -- I know of none at this time.  The
      > "problem" is that international connectivity for ISPs is rarely
      > coordinated (for economic or political reasons, not technical).  
      
      Yup and now we have seem to a cable shortage.  I hear the APCN
      is not yet up?  It's causing us some major problems since we have trouble
      fulfilling some customer commitments on time.
      
      > As such, in order for routing to work, you end up having to announce gobs
      > of more specifics from the "country block" for each ISP's portion of
      > the country block.
      
      No need if 10/8 is filtered from the different ISPs border routers?
      
      > If there is good cooperation among the ISPs, there are various games
      > you can play, however what would likely happen is one ISP ends up
      > transiting more load than others, making them unhappy, and causing the
      > good cooperation to break down.
      
      No problem, each ISP will only transit their direct customer.
      
      If this thing falls into place for AP countries, it will be a very
      powerful incentive to get interconnected and put up IXs since we
      have purely LOCAL-ONLY hosts and network space.
      
      Cheers,
      
      -- 
      miguel a.l. paraz  <map at iphil dot net>                              +63-2-893-0850
      iphil communications, makati city, philippines          <http://www.iphil.net> 
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      _________________________________________________________________________
      To unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe" to apops-request at apnic dot net
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------