[25730] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: PI space/filters question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Derek Balling)
Sun Nov 7 22:22:32 1999
Message-Id: <4.2.1.10.19991107191049.00a6b660@mail.megacity.org>
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 19:13:16 -0800
To: Steve Rubin <ser@tch.org>, Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>
From: Derek Balling <dredd@megacity.org>
Cc: "J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@cybernothing.org>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <19991107185708.A33428@tch.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
FWIW, I should think that xDSL providers should be held to the same
standards as Cable Internet providers. The similarities between the two
(always-on, homes-passed, etc.) are enough that they should have the same
criteria.
If there is a difference in how they can get PI space, then that's
something I think should be addressed. I don't think that trying to get the
same methodology for address space assignments is "sneaky" really.
My opinion, no one else's. :)
D
At 06:57 PM 11/7/99 -0800, Steve Rubin wrote:
>On Sun, Nov 07, 1999 at 07:49:17PM -0500, Alex Pilosov wrote:
> > However, I noticed that requirements for initial 24.* block allocation do
> > not specify existing allocations, and thought that sneaky way I might get
> > PI /20 by just specifying our approximate use in 6 months of the address
> > space.
> >
>
>...And since the ARIN folk read this mailing list, I suggest you change the
>name of your company before trying this now. ;)
>
>--
>Steve Rubin, Packet Monkey & Pilot - ser@tch.org - http://www.tch.org/~ser/
