Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations

Mathew Lodge lodge at houston.omnes.net
Sat Jan 27 18:20:25 UTC 1996

I've been reading this address allocation ping-pong match for some time,
and I'm a bit confused. I'd like to describe a real-world case, and gain
some understanding by getting some advice.

On one hand, we have registries that won't hand out /18 class C blocks for
fear of depleting the remaining address space too quickly.

On the other, we have "core" providers refusing to route longer prefixes
because their routers are about to melt down.

I'm currently trying to get a new ISP for a small country on its feet. It
can't get addresses from its upstream provider, because they've not got
enough and are trying to get some more themselves. They also want to be
multi-homed from day one. They currently offer all sorts of fully redundant
data services, and understandably they can't see why they should have a
single point of failure in their global Internet access.

We can spell BGP, and we'll teach them how to spell it too. How about some
concrete advice on The Right Thing to do from you folks?



| Mathew Lodge: lodge at houston.omnes.net |5599 San Felipe, 4th Floor |
| Internet Specialist, Omnes -- A       |Houston, Texas 77056, USA  |
| Schlumberger/Cable & Wireless company |Phone: +1 713 513 3237     |
| http://www.omnes.net/                 |Fax:   +1 713 513 3126     |

More information about the NANOG mailing list