[36503] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roeland Meyer)
Mon Apr 9 18:44:41 2001
Message-ID: <9DC8BBAD4FF100408FC7D18D1F092286039E28@condor.mhsc.com>
From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
To: 'mike harrison' <meuon@highertech.net>,
"John K. Doyle, Jr." <John.Doyle@oracle.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 15:21:12 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> From: mike harrison [mailto:meuon@highertech.net]
> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2001 3:08 PM
>
> John said:
> > Well, you could acquire a company that already has one. :)
>
> That has been the suggestion from several people.
> I've even considered it, especially when one of my local
> competitors has a /18, and they are much smaller than we are.
Isn't it wonderful how being a good netizen allows your less-picky
competitors to get a leg-up on you? Say what<!?!>, they're smaller than you
and have an /18? How did that happen?
> We 'NAT' an incredible amount of dial-up and commercial customers
> to reduce our need for public IP's, and trends thankfully went to
> customers WANTING to be NAT'd and Proxied for 'firewall' reasons,
> with only a few public IP's.
However, it kinda makes you wish that you hadn't NAT'd doesn't it? Then,
you'd have less of a problem qualifying for the /19.
> It seems a poor reasons for acquiring a company, as they
> really do not "own" the address space. --Mike--
Remember that point made ... about the communist manifesto?
