Re: IP renumbering timeframe

["Grant A. Kirkwood" <grant () tnarg org>]

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

-- 
Grant A. Kirkwood - grant () tnarg org
Fingerprint = D337 48C4 4D00 232D 3444 1D5D 27F6 055A BF0C 4AED