ARIN IP allocation questionn

Thu Jun 27 08:56:26 UTC 2002


>My *personal* opinion is that wise ISPs only punt customers to ARIN once
>they reach the point where they can, in fact, have a normal ARIN netblock
>assigned directly to them (currently a /20, unless I slept through another
>change...)

	The guidelines have a strong preference for singly-homed networks to use IP 
address space allocated to them from their upstreams. I can think of no 
logical reason* an ISP would prefer their customers to go to ARIN rather than 
deal with them. The global routing table is better off for it as well, as the 
customer's /20 would be a new route, rather than being included in their 
provider's presumably larger block.

	On the other hand, I can think of many reasons a customer would prefer to 
deal with ARIN than their upstream, assuming the meager cost wasn't a factor 
and they don't mind polluting the global table a tad. Of course, that's not 
really an operational issue.

	DS

	* The only reason I could possibly think of is if the ISP is afraid that the 
large allocation will impact their future allocations because they don't have 
the confidence or competence to extract a proper justification from their 
customer and present/defend that justification to ARIN when their next 
allocation comes up. But this wasn't the reason you were thinking of, right?