Class "B" forsale (fwd)

Jim Fleming JimFleming at unety.net
Mon Mar 10 17:55:03 UTC 1997


On Monday, March 10, 1997 8:34 AM, Alex P. Rudnev[SMTP:alex at Relcom.EU.net] wrote:
@ Hi. It's not good idea to discusse _can we /NIC/ allow or can we 
@ disallow_.
@ More interesting is _how to prevent address space wasting_ and _how to 
@ prevent extra payements..._.
@ 
@ If you'll disallow class B selling, Internet would lost 256*256 
@ addresses, because this class B network would be unused (and somebody 
@ would use class C networks instead_. It's bad thing, isn't it?
@ 
@ On the other hand, if you'll allow free saling of the address space, 
@ internet would be the homeplace of the big nabobs who can bye total 
@ address space and break down small competitors (and even small 
@ countries); it'll mean the deaths of the Internet, isn't it?
@ 

This is the case now...upstream providers are the "big nabobs"...
they do not incur the costs of renumbering, they do not get concerned
when they make a bid to a customer, they have the resources
to deliver. They may not have paid for these resources but they
have them...just check the records...

@ I do not know how would NOC go between this _scilla_ and _charibda_, but 
@ it's one of this important questions the internet's future depends of.
@ 
@ 

Yes...some people feel this is a very important area....
unfortunately, the solutions being proposed favor the
"big nabobs"...


--
Jim Fleming
Unir Corporation

e-mail:
JimFleming at unety.net
JimFleming at unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)






More information about the NANOG mailing list