On 29-Nov-2005, at 12:16, David Barak wrote:

Maybe my imagination just isn't good enough: could you toss me an example-type of organization where that would be problematic?

If we consider non-operators e.g. medium sized commercial or NGOs ... APNIC have a mechanism in-place, but most of the denizens of the Swamp are suspicious that if we were to sign an agreement with APNIC, we'd be giving up some of our historical rights and exposing ourselves to the risk of reclamation. Annual account fee (historical resource maintenance) $100.00 http://www.apnic.net/docs/policy/historical-maintain-guide.html http://www.apnic.net/member/feesinfo.html#non_mem_fee Until (and if) an ipv6 multi-homed transition is possible, medium sized organizations here in Oz will continue to use a mixture of PA and PI space to isolate us from dependence on a single carrier. In a country as large as the US, but sparsely populated except for scattered cities, each with millions of people, reliable and cost effective service delivery requires that we retain direct control of routing policy i.e. have our own chunks of PI space, though having one or more ASs is not necessary. Back to lurking, pjc