nanog mailing list archives

Re: Important New Requirement for IPv4 Requests [re "impacting revenue"]


From: Martin Hannigan <martin () theicelandguy com>
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 13:43:46 -0400

I can assure you that based on my own experiences in very large
companies that I'd have few issues  complying with this new
requirement. I like the idea and honestly, ARIN is damned if they do
(see this pretty inane thread) and damned if they don't (wait until
RIR exhaustion 'day' comes and goes and watch the conspiracy theories
as to why ARIN didn't 'do more').

Best,

Martin




On 4/21/09, Jo Rhett <jrhett () netconsonance com> wrote:
On Apr 21, 2009, at 2:42 PM, Shane Ronan wrote:
Mr Curran, given the response you've seen from the group, and in
particular the argument that most CEO's or Officers of firms will
simply sign off on what they IT staff tells them (as they have
little to no understanding of the situation),

You really should go ask a CEO if he'd sign off on something that he
doesn't understand.  Really.  I can assure you that your impression is
wrong, and most CEOs don't prefer to be standing in court defending
their actions.

can you explain what exactly you are hoping to achieve by heaping on
yet an additional requirement to the already over burdensome process
of receiving an IPv4 allocation?


Burdensome?  Really?  If you have your documentation together it takes
about 15 minutes from beginning of the application form until
receiving your new allocation.  I spend longer on hold any time I deal
with any other vendor.

--
Jo Rhett
Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source
and other randomness







-- 
Martin Hannigan                               martin () theicelandguy com
p: +16178216079
Power, Network, and Costs Consulting for Iceland Datacenters and Occupants


Current thread: