This is not a practical expectation. If done on a wide-scale basis, the whole concept of route aggregation is for naught. I would suggest tyhat you read: RFC2008, "Implications of Various Address Allocation Policies for Internet Routing", http://www.internic.net/rfc/rfc2008.txt - paul At 12:08 PM 2/26/97 +0000, Sean Rolinson wrote:
Agreed.
And it is my opinion that upstream providers should allow (or be required) portability of assigned IP addresses. Naturally, there are some logistics that need to be dealt with, but if someone is BGP peering, it pretty much boils down to an announcement change, correct?
We, as a provider, would not mind paying some nominal fee (cheap!) to our upstream provider for continued use of IP addresses after we have terminated our service. We have even considered getting the smallest possible connection to that particular provider just to be able to continually use their IP addresses. This does not seem like a very effective alternative for us or our upstream provider.
I am wondering what impact, if any, would requiring portability of IP addresses under certain criteria (BGP peering, etc) have on the Internet?