RE: ARIN allocating /20 netblocks?

[Jamie Scheinblum <jamie () fast net>]

Karl makes a real good point, renumbering places an un-needed burdon on the
customer; one they never asked for, and probably never expected.

I imagine stuff like this will just cause more and more customers to move
into environments with NAT, or encourage them to join the bigger networks
where renumbering would be less likely.

-Jamie
(speaking only for myself)

-----Original Message-----
From: Karl Denninger [mailto:karl () mcs net]
Sent: Saturday, May 16, 1998 10:35 PM
To: Michael Shields
Cc: Jon Lewis; jamie () ais net; Jeremiah Kristal; nanog () merit edu
Subject: Re: ARIN allocating /20 netblocks?

[snip]

We have some customers right now which encompass multiple downline connected
parties over large geographic areas, and some of their equipment is
incapable
of doing things like DHCP (one comes to mind that happens to be a state 
agency).  Renumbering THEM would be a job out of the depths of Hades 
itself; even broaching the subject would likely cost us the account.

Any significant ISP has customers like this; there is no reason to impose
these costs on you because you're smaller than someone else - no technical
reason that is.

--
-- 
Karl Denninger (karl () MCS Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin
http://www.mcs.net/          | T1's from $600 monthly / All Lines
K56Flex/DOV
                             | NEW! Corporate ISDN Prices dropped by up to
50%!
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| EXCLUSIVE NEW FEATURE ON ALL PERSONAL
ACCOUNTS
Fax:   [+1 312 803-4929]     | *SPAMBLOCK* Technology now included at no
cost