NSP ... New Information

Jeremy Porter jerry at fc.net
Mon Jun 9 03:51:38 UTC 1997

Use DHCP, get your customers to use DHCP.  Current Best Current Pratices
for IP allocations (http://ftp.fc.net/rfc/rfc2050.txt) states:
   5.  Due to the requirement to increase the utilization efficiency
       of IPv4 address space, all assignments are made with the
       assumption that sites make use of variable length subnet mask
       (VLSM) and classless technologies within their network.  Any
       request for address space based on the use of classfull
       assumptions will require a detailed justification.  The use of
       classfull technologies for the purposes of administrative
       convenience is generally insupportable due to the limited
       availability of free IPv4 address space.
       While it is understood that the use of static addressing may
       ease some aspects of administration, the current rate of
       consumption of the remaining unassigned IPv4 address space does
       not permit the assignment of addresses for administrative ease.
       Organizations considering the use of static IP address assignment
       are expected to investigate and implement dynamic assignment
       technologies whenever possible.

This means that you should use renumbering technology as much as
possible, so that when you can justify a /19 you can get one,
until then, find an ISP that is multi-homes and can provide you
the IP addresses you need, and consider two connections to them,
giving you the benefit of being multi-homed without the cost of
the routers needed for full BGP, or needing to justify a /19.

In message < at texoma.net>, Larry Vaden writes:
>At 09:39 PM 6/8/97 -0500, Jeremy Porter wrote:
>>And besides, if it weren't for US governement interference, ARIN
>>would already be up and running, and the members could find solutions
>>for this problem.  But regardless, the allocation group does not
>>controll the policies of the individual companies, and therefore,
>>if you insist on causing grief for the rest of us, your best bet
>>to to file Anti-trust actions against carriers, like Sprint, Digex, 
>>and others that are filtering.  (hint, good luck, you will need it.)
>I have no intent of causing anyone grief, but rather wish to learn from the
>NANOG members (save any dogmas) and compete on a level playing field.
>Our only legal actions have been defensive in nature.  Number 1 was against
>telcos red-lining PRI service to rural Texas.  Number 2 regarded an email
>privacy/ECPA issue raised by the Texas Attorney General through the use of
>an improperly issued subpoena.  We had good luck in both, thank you  [8-))
>The input of those from NANOG is very valuable, IMHO.  I'm looking for the
>thoughts of NANOG members, not to convince them of anything.  Please excuse
>my thoughts that the NANOG members may have more experience with these
>issues and that we and other small ISPs can benefit from NANOG input.
>In fact, the real question we posed at NANOG 10 is:
>What can be done to properly operate a network with diversity and
>redundancy without the use of scarce resources, presuming the downside of
>them not being granted?
>Larry Vaden, founder and CEO               help-desk 903-813-4500
>Internet Texoma, Inc. <http://www.texoma.net> direct 903-870-0365
>bringing the real Internet to rural Texomaland   fax 903-868-8551
>Member ISP/C, TISPA and USIPA                  pager 903-867-6571

Jeremy Porter, Freeside Communications, Inc.      jerry at fc.net
PO BOX 80315 Austin, Tx 78708  |  1-800-968-8750  |  512-458-9810

More information about the NANOG mailing list