Internic address allocation policy
hwb at upeksa.sdsc.edu
Sun Mar 19 16:26:39 UTC 1995
Well, I see two problems, one is that whatever solution be found needs
community consensus. Otherwise we may end up with ten anti-NICs or so?
Or at least many unhappy customers? The other problem is that (at
least I, but may be I am missing something) don't see how at the global
systems level this resolves the issue of appropriating address space
to, say, a j-random, perhaps new and ignorant with uncertain future,
service provider who would like to have 10,000 customers a year from
now, and wants 10,000 Class-C numbers accordingly. I still don't
understand what the groundrules for address allocation would be, at
least at the level below your top-level allocations. Even if you push
the problem a level down, it would still have to be resolved. The
resource will be scarce somewhere.
I am trying to focus on the IP address allocation guidelines here, not
the speediness of registrations, with the latter being more of a
technical (though apparently painful) issue, and probably a matter of
having enough resources allocated.
More information about the NANOG