ARIN?

Fri Nov 6 12:53:20 UTC 1998

On Fri, Nov 06, 1998 at 01:02:36AM -0800, I Am Not An Isp wrote:
> At 02:49 AM 11/6/98 -0500, Jon Lewis wrote:
> 
> >So can I qualify for my own chunk of space (I'll be nice and only ask for
> >a /16) if I use RIP and can't subnet?  I find it hard to believe ARIN
> >would buy "but my routers won't let me subnet" as justification for
> >address space.
> 
> First of all, I think we've established that @Home's current utilization is
> pretty good.
> 
> Secondly, @Home wasn't using classfull addressing at first because they
> didn't want to put in the effort, they simply had no choice.  There was no
> equipment available at the time which would do CIDR.  So, it was either
> allocate them X amount and make @Home renumber into CIDR when the software
> was available to do CIDR (which they were in the process of doing last time
> I talked to them), or put them out of business.
> 
> Personally, I don't think ARIN should be in charge of deciding who stays in
> business because the state of the technology isn't up to their standards.
> Nor do I think we should stifle new technologies because it doesn't
> suddenly appear on the scene fully mature.  I'm all for saving address
> space, but not at the cost of random
> 
> But then again, I'm not ARIN - hell, some would say I'm not even an ISP. :p

That argument equally applies to hardware which is available, but is a LOT
cheaper without the feature set that is required to "comply" with ARIN's
demands.

Why should ARIN be able to put someone's business model into the trash can
because of technical complience issues?

--
-- 
Karl Denninger (karl at denninger.net) http://www.mcs.net/~karl
I ain't even *authorized* to speak for anyone other than myself, so give
up now on trying to associate my words with any particular organization.