Internic address allocation policy

Jeremy Porter jerry at
Sun Mar 19 04:39:03 UTC 1995

>> If you fail to agree, you don't get a number. Throughout the FCC letters 
>> there is a constant mention of "this scarce DNIC resource may necessitate 
>> reassignment of codes not implemented within a six-month period.
>> Now if the FCC has been doing this I am sure we could work out something 
>> with the Nic.
>> Joseph Stroup
>Of course folks in China recognise the authority of the FCC in this matter. :)
>Or even the Internic... 

Actually you can bet China does comply with international
treaty and local regulation when attaching up to the International
X.25 Network.
And you can also bet they they get their addresses assigned
by the Nic and in cooperation with with Asia IP coordinators.

One could hardly call them connected if they couldn't complete X.25
calls, or route IP to everyone else in the world.

The point here is that, the Internic is being counter productive,
with the expressed goals of CIDR.  They have not been assigning
large enough blocks to ISPs, which defeats the purpose of CIDR.

There are only two reasons I can see for this:
The Internic doesn't have a clue as to what the hell they are doing.
The are intentionally abusing a trust granted them by the Internet

If such policies continue, that trust WILL be revoked, either through 
action internal (IANA, IETF, and others) or external, litigation.

Either way they are asking for trouble, because when it comes right
down to it, if I cannot, through reasonable efforts on my
part, be assigned the IP address I need for my business,
there is going to be a stink.  

And you can bet the 500+ other small ISPs are going to
take this active threat to their livelyhood sitting down.

|  Jeremy Porter (512)-339-6094 Freeside Communications, Inc. info at  |
|  jerry at  (512)-339-4466 (data) P.O. Box 530264 Austin, TX 78753    |

More information about the NANOG mailing list