nanog mailing list archives
Re: ARIN allocating /20 netblocks?
From: Jon Lewis <jlewis () inorganic5 fdt net>
Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 16:36:10 -0400 (EDT)
On Sat, 16 May 1998, Karl Denninger wrote:
Why do you need to renumber out of previous space if MCI doesn't have to when they get a bigger block handed to them?
Well...because I knew from day 1 that our UUNet space was non-portable, and that we were effectively borrowing it.
Why should your *customers* bear the burden of this policy?
This was the part that sucked. Renumbering was a bitch, but with proper planning, it really wasn't too big a deal...just lots of work. Renumbering is one of those tasks during which you really find out which of your customers have clues and which are a few clues short of a full deck.
My point: you shouldn't, and your customer's shouldn't. You should, as a multi-homed ISP, be able to get a /19 immediately and without obstruction - period.
We didn't start out multihomed. We were singlehomed for 3 years. Are you saying we should have been able to keep our UUNet IP space (even though we left UUNet)? ------------------------------------------------------------------ Jon Lewis <jlewis () fdt net> | http://noagent.com/?jl1 for cheap Network Administrator | life insurance over the net. Florida Digital Turnpike | ______http://inorganic5.fdt.net/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key____
Current thread:
- Re: Two renumbering questions Alan Hannan (May 01)
- Re: Two renumbering questions Kim Hubbard (May 01)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Two renumbering questions Steve Sobol (May 01)
- Re: Two renumbering questions Steve Sobol (May 01)
- Re: Two renumbering questions Brian Wallingford (May 04)
- Message not available
- Re: Two renumbering questions Jay R. Ashworth (May 05)
- Message not available
- Re: Two renumbering questions John R. Levine (May 05)
