Request for Comments on a topological address block for N. Calif.

The issue Andrew and Tony were raising was a bit more simple
and a bit more complicated on several fronts. Let's start
with a picture:

  MAE-WEST PBNAP MAE-EAST

  39.0/10 39.64/10 39.128/10

   A------| S----| A--|
   S------| M----| S--|
   M------| N9---| M--|
   N9-----| NE---| N9-|
   NE-----| Y----| NE-|
   X------| Z--|

In normal conditions:

  How does X get traffic to Y?
  How does Y get traffic to X?
  How does X get traffic to Z?
  How does Z get traffic to X?
  How does Y get traffic to Z?
  How does Z get traffic to Y?

  How does A get traffic to Y?
  How does Y get traffic to A?

  Where can 39.0/9 be aggregated?
  Where can 39/8 be aggregated?

  What are the side-effects of both these aggregations
  when things are operating normally?

In failure conditions:

  If S falls off MAE-WEST, how does it get traffic
  to the customers of A, M, N9, NE and X that are
  addressed by 39.0/10?

  How do A, M, N9, NE, and X get to S's customers
  that are addressed by 39.0/10?

  If A falls off MAE-WEST, how does it get traffic
  to the customers of A, M, N9, NE, and X
  that are in 39.0/10? How does it get to all of 39.0/9?

  How does the rest of the world get to A's customers
  that are addressed in 39.0/10?

  What happens in both these cases to traffic between Z
  and everything in 39.0/9, in each direction?

These definitely are not hypothetical questions.

If geographical or stratum-based allocation that is not
_also_ provider-based is to fly, this is precisely the type
of thing that must be dealt with.

  Sean.