Address block problem
mury at goldengate.net
Mon Jul 31 18:40:07 EDT 2000
I'll tell you why it's annoying. If you are managing multiple routers and
multiple IP blocks every time you have to make a global change (for
example in an access-list) it just gets to be that much more work.
I know there are a ton of ISPs that do not filter traffic, and I don't
want to get into a discussion on why you should or should not filter
traffic. The point is there are a lot of ISPs and many more companys that
do filter traffic on their core routers. If I need to make a change to my
access-lists in general it causes my list to be a multiple of however many
blocks I have longer than it needs to be. And for the person who is going
to say just do a "permit any", that doesn't work because I do have one
small chunk that I treat differently, even at the core.
Everything is more difficult to manage. You have to put more blocks into
your network statements. You have that many more blocks to change contact
info for, and I for one have never found dealing with Arin's
contact info templates the easiest thing in the world. You have more
lines for sendmail to check through to allow or deny mail relay. The
examples could go on for quite awhile.
No, it's not going to cost me $10K more money to deal with it, but it is a
And to Bruce, I was told by Arin that they no longer do any block
reservations. And if someone else out there is able to reserve IP space,
and I wasn't able to, I'm going to be incredibly unhappy with Arin. I
don't think any court of law would take kindly to them playing favorites.
GoldenGate Internet Services
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Andy Dills wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Bruce Robertson wrote:
> > It was my understanding that 126.96.36.199/19 was reserved for our future
> > expansion past the end of 188.8.131.52/19. I find that this block has
> > been assigned to someone else. Why was this allowed to happen without
> > any notification?
> > Once again I find that I am penalized for being frugal with IP addresses. All
> > of the ARIN policies are such that people who waste IP addresses are
> > rewarded for that behavior, and people who manage to slow their address
> > consumption to almost zero are penalized. On top of that, this action just
> > added to fragmentation, since when I need another /19, it will now no longer
> > be contiguous with an existing block.
> While I'm happy to note that my contiguous /19 is still available for me
> to grab (which will be happening pretty soon), I fail to see what
> the big deal is.
> What does having the contiguous /19 really get you?
> I mean, 7 times out of 10 there will be two routes for the given CIDR
> block...different prefix lengths for managing inbound traffic, multi-homed
> customers, etc. So number of routes isn't a large consideration, at least
> to me.
> Is it just an annoyance thing?
> Andy Dills 301-682-9972
> Xecunet, LLC www.xecu.net
> Dialup * Webhosting * E-Commerce * High-Speed Access
More information about the ARIN-discuss