[36541] in North American Network Operators' Group
Unused IP space (was RE: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Segal, Mark)
Tue Apr 10 14:46:46 2001
Message-ID: <716BF3944E54D4118CBC00D0B765EADE8433BE@phobos.inside.axxent.ca>
From: "Segal, Mark" <Mark.Segal@Corp.Axxent.Ca>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:40:35 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
I wonder if a finders fee could be setup by ARIN, ie 50% ofr the allocation
:).. I personally know people that have /16, who either haven't routed them
or are routing them but using 1-2 IPs...
I think the angry mob approach is the best way to deal with the /8 & /16
squatters.. :).
Mark
--
Mark Segal
Director, Data and Internet Planning
Axxent Corp.
Tel: (416)907-2858
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Levine [mailto:matt@deliver3.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2001 6:42 PM
> To: Kyle C. Bacon; nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: RE: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20
>
>
> Netname: HALLIBURTON
> Netblock: 34.0.0.0 - 34.255.255.255
>
>
> I have a hunch Halliburton oil doesn't need 16 million ips..
> I also have
> a hunch that they wont be getting revoked anytime soon ;)
>
>
> __
> Matt Levine <matt@deliver3.com>
>
> "I used to think that the brain was the most wonderful organ
> in my body.
> Then I realized who was telling me this."
> -- Emo Phillips
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of
> Kyle C. Bacon
> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2001 6:21 PM
> To: mike harrison
> Cc: John K. Doyle, Jr.; nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20
>
>
>
> >>It seems a poor reasons for acquiring a company, as they
> >>really do not "own" the address space. --Mike--
>
>
> That is an interesting comment, has anyone ever heard of ARIN
> revoking IP's from a entity who no longer meets current ARIN
> criteria for a give size allocation? Or is it infact the
> case that once you get the IP space as long as you keep paying
> for it you get to keep it? in essence you do "own" it as long as
> you keep the capitalist portion of ARIN happy and pay your annual
> IP bills? (no offense to those ARIN workforce members among us).
>
> K
>
>
>
>
> mike harrison
> <meuon@higher To: "John K. Doyle, Jr."
> <John.Doyle@oracle.com>
> tech.net> cc: nanog@merit.edu
> Sent by: Subject: Re: Getting a
> "portable" /19 or /20
> owner-nanog@m
> erit.edu
>
>
> 04/09/2001
> 06:07 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.
> 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.
>
> It seems a poor reasons for acquiring a company, as they
> really do not "own" the address space. --Mike--
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
