Re: Address Assignment Question

[Jérôme Nicolle <jerome () ceriz fr>]

2011/6/20 Leo Bicknell <bicknell () ufp org>:
> In a message written on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 08:01:24AM -0700, JC Dill wrote:
> > I would use this answer in reply to the customer, and ask them to
> > (specifically) justify their request for the discontiguous blocks.

That's like asking them to state the obvious...

> Or, just don't offer it.  Make them fit in one block, giving them
> 3 months to renumber into a single, larger block if necessary.

Well, forcing a periodic renumbering whenever adress gets freed and
there's a potential agregation is a good thing. It should be stated in
service agreements, IMHO.

> It sends a strong message you're willing to give them all the space
> they need, but won't help them evade RBL's.

Unless many contiguous blocks are assigned as different objects : a
RBL must NOT presume of one end-user's inetnum unless it has been
cathed doing nasty things AND didn't comply to abuse@ requests.

But most RBL managers are shitheads anyway, so help them evade,
that'll be one more proof of spamhaus &co. uselessness and negative
impact on the Internet's best practices.


-- 
Jérôme Nicolle