[147414] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Sad IPv4 story?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Blackman)
Fri Dec 9 16:12:18 2011
In-Reply-To: <4E600760-233F-4F9F-B30D-8A3931271548@queuefull.net>
From: Mark Blackman <mark@exonetric.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 21:11:32 +0000
To: Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net>
Cc: NANOG Operators Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 9 Dec 2011, at 21:05, Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net> wrote:
>=20
> On Dec 9, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Mark Blackman wrote:
>>> On Dec 9, 2011, at 1:07 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
>>>> We're going to be hearing a lot more of these. It's the nature of finit=
e resources, and of human nature when faced with them. At some point, this w=
ill find its way into courtrooms under the rubric of a barrier to entry. It a=
lready has in terms of antitrust when a company wanted to move its PA prefix=
to different upstream.
>>=20
>> I've had transit service pulled, so the provider can reclaim the /21 that=
was bundled with the transit.
>=20
> I'm sorry to hear about that... Do you know why they reclaimed the block?=
E.g. was it used to support a "higher margin" service for another customer=
?
>=20
> -Benson
Leased line customers.=
