nanog mailing list archives
Re: ARIN to Allocate from 64.0.0.0/8
From: Steve Rubin <ser () tch org>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 17:15:37 -0800
On Thu, Nov 11, 1999 at 07:02:27AM +1000, Bruce Campbell wrote:
The #'s have to come from somewhere, and 64/8 is just as good as any other chunk of address space. Maybe a charge of $1/yr should be imposed forISPs within the APNIC and RIPE ranges of 61/8 and 62/8 respectively have already gone through trying to get filters redone by US ISPs over the past few years.
I think you missed my point. "Back in the day" SRI and NSI handed out address space in any size chunk you could imagine asking for. How much of this isn't used (My guess: atleast %60 is unused). How many of these companies do not exist anymore? If you charged $1 for any allocation that wasn't being announced (the quickest way to figure out if its being used), then any block that wasn't paid for could easily be reassigned. Unless we want to go IPv6, the only solution to running out of address space is to get the space back that is assigned to non-existant companies. -- Steve Rubin, Packet Monkey & Pilot - ser () tch org - http://www.tch.org/~ser/
Current thread:
- ARIN to Allocate from 64.0.0.0/8 Richard Jimmerson (Nov 10)
- Re: ARIN to Allocate from 64.0.0.0/8 Richard Steenbergen (Nov 10)
- Re: ARIN to Allocate from 64.0.0.0/8 Kai Schlichting (Nov 10)
- Re: ARIN to Allocate from 64.0.0.0/8 Richard Steenbergen (Nov 10)
- Re: ARIN to Allocate from 64.0.0.0/8 Steve Rubin (Nov 10)
- Re: ARIN to Allocate from 64.0.0.0/8 Bruce Campbell (Nov 10)
- Re: ARIN to Allocate from 64.0.0.0/8 Steve Rubin (Nov 10)
- Re: ARIN to Allocate from 64.0.0.0/8 bmanning (Nov 10)
- Re: ARIN to Allocate from 64.0.0.0/8 Kai Schlichting (Nov 10)
- Re: ARIN to Allocate from 64.0.0.0/8 Richard Steenbergen (Nov 10)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: ARIN to Allocate from 64.0.0.0/8 Aleksi Suhonen (Nov 20)