[22759] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Incompetance abounds at the InterNIC
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Phillip Vandry)
Wed Jan 20 18:38:27 1999
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 18:24:13 -0500 (EST)
From: Phillip Vandry <vandry@Mlink.NET>
To: Phil Howard <phil@whistler.intur.net>
cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 20 Jan 1999 13:20:33 EST."
<199901201920.NAA03304@whistler.intur.net>
> I don't need to know the thousands of companies by name. I do know that
> one of my customers simply had no choice but to use real external addresses
> because of the requirements of the companies they connect to. I do know
> that two major automobile companies are involved, as well as several
> large corporations they do construction work for. In addition, there
> are over a hundred sub-contracting companies they connect to.
That may well be the case, but we can't stand for the public Internet's
address space being depleted so that the someone else's private network
can be simplified.
Besides, if they don't intent to route it, then, under CIDR, which provider
should they get their public addresses from?
> > That's fine. As long as they don't mind spending time and money renumbering
> > their entire network once it gets connected to the internet.
>
> That's my point. With real addresses, it addressed the issues of having to
> renumber when new business interconnections were made, or when any of them
> decided to get on the Internet. NAT was not viable then, as it is today.
They *will* have to renumber any time they change ISPs, or if they do not
make their initial Internet connection to the same ISP from which they got
addresses in the first place (not intending to route them publically at
that time)
-Phil
