nanog mailing list archives

Re: Important New Requirement for IPv4 Requests


From: Jon Lewis <jlewis () lewis org>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 19:55:57 -0400 (EDT)

On Tue, 21 Apr 2009, Jo Rhett wrote:

It's a common request we see. We refuse it, and point them to the Google documentation that shows that unique IPs don't help or hurt their SEO standings.

Some "customers" have wised up and when providing IP justification, they don't mention SEO anymore. However, I've seen several requests in the past couple weeks from customers/prospective customers wanting /24's or larger subnets (or they're not buying/canceling service) where the justification provided was something ARIN would probably be ok with, but IMO was completely FoS. It's hard to tell sales "no" when the customer tells you exactly what they think you want to hear [for IP justification], but your gut tells you "this is BS".

BTW, I admit I've paid little attention to the legacy vs ARIN members arguments, as I'm not a legacy space holder and my time is largely occupied by more pressing [to me] matters...but why do legacy holders get a free ride? If we look at what happened with domain registration (at least for com|net|org), back in the old days, you sent off an email to hostmaster () internic net and you got your domain registered. There were no fees. Then Network Solutions took over and domain name registrations cost money. Existing domains were not grandfathered in and either you started paying a yearly fee for your domains or you lost them. Why didn't the same thing happen when Internic/IANA stopped directly handing out IPs and the RIRs took over that function?

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Jon Lewis                   |  I route
 Senior Network Engineer     |  therefore you are
 Atlantic Net                |
_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________


Current thread: