Re: Address Assignment Question

[Aftab Siddiqui <aftab.siddiqui () gmail com>]

Let them submit the IP justification form, I would like to read how spammers
justify their IP usage and I would really like to see how RIR would take it.

*Interetesting*

Regards,

Aftab A. Siddiqui


On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Jason Baugher <jason () thebaughers com>wrote:

> On 6/20/2011 7:44 AM, Steve Richardson wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Jared Mauch<jared () puck nether net>
> >  wrote:
> >
> > > On Jun 20, 2011, at 8:30 AM, Bret Clark wrote:
> > >
> > >  Personally I would charge them for the /24 too, makes users think twice
> > > > about the need for a block that large.
> > > We do charge them for addresses already and cost doesn't come into
> > play.  We charge for assignments shorter than /28 to discourage IP
> > hogs.
> >
> >  I would also give them a /64 per lan (alt: broadcast domain) as well to
> > > allow them to start working with IPv6 for their email.
> > >
> > > - Jared
> > They have inquired about IPv6 already, but it's only gone so far as
> > that.  I would gladly give them a /64 and be done with it, but my
> > concern is that they are going to want several /64 subnets for the
> > same reason and I don't really *think* it's a legitimate reason.  Bear
> > in mind that "legitimate" in this context is referring to the
> > justification itself, not their business model.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > steve
> >
> >  Did everyone miss that the customer didn't request a /24, they requested
> a "/24s worth in even more dis-contiguous blocks". I can only think of one
> reason why a customer would specifically ask for that. They are concerned
> that they'll get blacklisted. They're hoping if they do, it will be a small
> block of many rather than one entire block.
>
> When customers make strange requests without giving a good explanation, I
> have to assume they're up to something.
>
> Jason