Allocation of IP Addresses
michael at memra.com
Thu Mar 14 00:43:02 UTC 1996
On Wed, 13 Mar 1996, Jim Browning wrote:
> A. a single allocation capable of supporting planned growth, or
> B. incremental allocations of *contiguous* blocks
> InterNIC's current CIDR allocation practice does not support either of
> these options.
Here's an idea. Let new ISP's reserve large blocks (say /16's) in 65/8,
66/8, .... but don't let them actually use these addresses on the global
Internet. Then, the ISP can run a Network Address Translation gateway and
give their customers 65/8 addresses while still using a chunk from their
provider's block. And they can switch providers without forcing their
customers to renumber. Then, after they have demonstrated that they
should be given a /16, open up the block they were given in 65/8 for use
without the NAT.
Of course, there is one little problem with this....
bash$ whois 65
Air Force Logistics Command (ASN-LOGNET) LOGNET-AS 65
IANA (RESERVED-7) Reserved 220.127.116.11 - 18.104.22.168
bash$ whois 96
Army Finance and Accounting Office (ASN-JTELS) JTELS-BEN1-AS 96
IANA (RESERVED-8) Reserved 22.214.171.124 - 126.96.36.199
How did these guys get such big chunks of address space reserved?
> The day to day implementation of policy by the InterNIC has increasingly
> critical impact on our industry, to the point of controlling who has the
> opportunity to succeed and who does not. IMHO, it is imperative that:
> 1. this function be performed in an understandable manner,
> 2. objective criteria be consistently applied
> 3. the criteria in use be publicly available, and
> 4. there be defined mechanisms for the 'appeal' of decisions made in the
> processing of allocation requests.
> Recent experience and observation leads me to conclude that these
> imperatives are perhaps not being met. Am I all wet????
I think that the fundamental problem here is that the Internic is
fundamentally clueless about important issues such as global routing and
*BUSINESS* issues. They are behaving a lot like a government bureaucracy
or a regulatory agency.
I don't really see how this can be fixed with the current system of
having a US government agency writing a contract with a private US
company to provide a fundamental international infrastructure service!
Michael Dillon Voice: +1-604-546-8022
Memra Software Inc. Fax: +1-604-546-3049
http://www.memra.com E-mail: michael at memra.com
More information about the NANOG