[47569] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IP renumbering timeframe
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Grant A. Kirkwood)
Mon May 6 14:03:53 2002
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
From: "Grant A. Kirkwood" <grant@tnarg.org>
Reply-To: grant@tnarg.org
To: David Conrad <david.conrad@nominum.com>, nanog <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 11:03:32 -0700
In-Reply-To: <B8FC0E45.A92B%david.conrad@nominum.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-Id: <200205061103.32861.grant@tnarg.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Monday 06 May 2002 10:41 am, David Conrad wrote:
> On 5/6/02 10:20 AM, "Grant A. Kirkwood" <grant@tnarg.org> wrote:
> > I'm sorry, but ARIN's policy practically _encourages_ the "efficient
> > wasting" of space to qualify for PI space. This is one of the most
> > frustrating things to deal with.
>
> As someone who used to run a registry, one of the most frustrating things
> to deal with was watching ISPs pee in their own pool and then scream at
> the registries 'cause the water was yellow.
>
> Just how big should the DFZ be?
What are we trying to solve here? AFAIK, the policy exists because of the
supposed "shortage" of IP space.
Let's not regurgitate the "basement-multihomers" discussion.
--
Grant A. Kirkwood - grant@tnarg.org
Fingerprint = D337 48C4 4D00 232D 3444 1D5D 27F6 055A BF0C 4AED
