IP renumbering timeframe
Scott Granados
scott at graphidelix.net
Mon May 6 17:33:37 UTC 2002
Hmmm, maybe my experience with Arin is differnet but it wasn't all that
difficult for me. I received a /19 initial allocation and never had to
use upstream space at all!!! It took a little more paperwork and
perhaps my case was unique but it was quite painless.
Scott
On Mon, 6 May 2002,
Grant A. Kirkwood wrote:
>
> On Monday 06 May 2002 10:00 am, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
> > > What others have told you here is correct: when you terminated your
> > > contract with Cogent [any contract language nonwithstanding] you gave
> > > up your "right" to use any portion of their address space.
> > >
> > > As one person on here already pointed out, this is a good thing. Think
> > > about it.
> >
> > What it tells me is I should have wasted enough space to consume 8 /24s
> > long ago, so I could get a /20 directly from ARIN. I assign IPs to
> > customers very conservatively. Multiple DSL customers with static IPs
> > are put on a shared subnet instead of one subnet per customer. I easily
> > could have used 8 /24's a year ago and still conformed to ARIN rules. At
> > the time I was only using 3 /24's. We recently reached 8 /24s and
> > applied to ARIN a few weeks ago for a /20, but it sounds like the best
> > thing to do is to use IPs in the most inefficient way possible (while
> > still conforming to ARIN policy) in order to quickly qualify for PI
> > space.
> >
> > -Ralph
>
> <rant>
>
> I'm sorry, but ARIN's policy practically _encourages_ the "efficient
> wasting" of space to qualify for PI space. This is one of the most
> frustrating things to deal with. What's a startup ISP/MSP/ASP-type to do?
> You want PI space for the benefit of your customers (for obvious reasons),
> but ARIN requires that you start with an upstream's space. So you generate
> B.S. justification for 8 /24s, slap a zillion IPs on some dumb 386
> somewhere, then request PI space from ARIN. Then two years later your
> upstream ISP realizes you don't need the space anymore, then MAYBE assigns
> it elsewhere.
>
> This just seems counter-productive to me. There really should be a vehicle
> for these types of situations.
>
> Grant
>
>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list