[92282] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [Fwd: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Bates)
Wed Sep 13 09:54:15 2006
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 08:53:27 -0500
From: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
To: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
Cc: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <77F03750-4F18-4E0B-8478-19FA26D6858B@virtualized.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
David Conrad wrote:
> I'm sure the same argument was used for telephone numbers when technical
> folk were arguing against number portability.
>
Number portability is a different can of worms, and many telephone companies
pushed for it. However, telephone numbers have been assigned in large blocks,
when only 1 number might be needed. This was a big issue for CLEC dailups, where
999 numbers could go to waste. If ARIN handed out prefixes the same way, there
wouldn't be any IPv4 space left.
"Dude! Check it! I got a /20 for my house, man! It was a steal. Remember in the
day when ARIN wouldn't let me have it because I only have 2 hosts here?" *insane
laughter* .... or .... "IPs for sale! We've acquired 20 /8 networks! How big do
you want to go?" (given that laws have indicated a dislike for domain squatting,
I wonder how IP squatting would work?)
-Jack
