Allocation of IP Addresses

Jim Browning jfbb at
Thu Mar 14 04:14:50 UTC 1996

>From:  David R. Conrad[SMTP:davidc at]
>Sent:  Wednesday, March 13, 1996 6:50 PM
>>> Bullshit.  The InterNIC is very much aware of global routing issues.
>>Then why have they not yet come up with a workable policy like the one
>>RIPE uses to release /16 blocks incrementally to new ISP's?
>All 3 registries have essentially the same policy with respect to the
>growth of new blocks.  However, given InterNIC's load, the end effect
>may be different (remember, InterNIC receives approximately 50 new ISP
>requests per week -- how much space should they reserve for new ISPs?).
>>> What business issues are you talking about?
>>Basically, the market demand is INCREDIBLY HIGH and businesses want to
>>build up infrastructure to meet this demand but the Internic IP address
>>allocation procedures are too confusing and take too long.
>Your proposal is?  If you say charging for address space, please
>explain what would stop deep pocket companies from buying up all the
>address space?

The answer is to have published, objective criteria, consistently applied, 
with a defined appeal process and accountability.  It's hard to play by the 
rules if you don't know what they are, and one has only to look at the /14 
allocation to @Home to realize that the "slow start" rules do not apply to 
everyone equally.
Jim Browning <jfbb at>

More information about the NANOG mailing list