Re: IP address fee??

[Christopher Schulte <schulte+nanog-post () nospam schulte org>]

At 11:39 AM 9/5/2002 -0700, Etaoin Shrdlu wrote:
> > At least as importantly, why do 254 addresses get provided where the
> > actual need might not warrant that quantity?
>
> Because it's easier to do the reverse DNS? Sorry to contribute to the
> general noise, but that answer's close to the truth.

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2317.html

Easier maybe... But with classless delegation of IN-ADDR.ARPA
this should not be an issue any longer.

> --
> ...some sort of steganographic chaffing and winnowing scheme
> already exists in practice right here: I frequently find myself
> having to sort through large numbers of idiotic posts to find
> the good ones.   -- Rufus Faloofus

--
Christopher Schulte
http://www.schulte.org/
Do not un-munge my @nospam.schulte.org
email address.  This address is valid.