[20185] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [YA] Fwd: Class B Purchase
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Kim Hubbard)
Tue Oct 6 20:09:25 1998
To: michael@memra.com (Michael Dillon)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 19:56:59 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.93.981006154654.24543K-100000@sidhe.memra.com> from "Michael Dillon" at Oct 6, 98 04:00:35 pm
From: Kim Hubbard <kimh@arin.net>
>
> > I also think the registries should actually be registries and
> > not try to be the Internet's mommy.
>
> IMHO it is part of an IP registry's job to make sure that applications for
> IP address space meet the publicly agreed upon criteria. And if that
> criteria says that you need to justify the quantity of addresses you
> receive, it may be mommy work but it is necessary work. But I want to know
> why ARIN cannot simply issue an appropriately sized portable block of
> addresses to anyone who is legitimately multihomed? Why can't ARIN
> maintain a register of companies who are multihomed and tag their IP
> allocations, of whatever size, as "portable". I suppose we could sidestep
> Sprint and use the swamp addresses which Sprint filters on a /24 boundary.
> But why can't we just carve off a chunk of 214/8 and "register" it to
> organizations who need portable space in chunks smaller than /19?
>
> This just makes too much sense to me.
Michael,
Could you define "legitimately multihomed" please?
Kim
>
> --
> Michael Dillon - E-mail: michael@memra.com
> Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com
>
>
