[ppml] Last Call for Comment: Policy Proposal 2002-6
Bill Darte
billd at cait.wustl.edu
Fri Nov 15 10:55:38 EST 2002
I basically agree that a renumbering timetable is necessary and that is
should try to be compassionate without leading to procrastination...we want
to motivate the return behavior. I also agree that people should be prepared
for the migration by the time they take advantage of the policy. Perhaps
there is a middle ground that would 'scale'... maybe a maximum of 3 levels.
3 months for aggregates smaller than /22, 6 months for /22-/20 and 12 months
for larger than /20. Would this be too cumbersome? What about only 2
levels?
billd
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Taylor, Stacy [mailto:Stacy_Taylor at icgcomm.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 9:38 AM
> To: 'Craig A. Huegen'; Taylor, Stacy
> Cc: 'Sweeting, John'; ARIN PPML
> Subject: RE: [ppml] Last Call for Comment: Policy Proposal 2002-6
>
>
> There is no one on this list who does not understand the pain of
> renumbering. However, it seems to me that the scope of this
> policy does not
> encompass the renumbering of large end-sites. In my RFC2050 /24
> reclamation/Smackdown many endusers complained that it would
> take them 6
> months to move off my numbers, but when threatened with
> routing cessation
> they were off in 3 weeks. People prepared to utilize this
> policy should
> have the resources already in place to renumber when they
> make the request.
>
> An organization turning in three disparate /24s for a /22
> should not require
> that much time.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Craig A. Huegen [mailto:chuegen at cisco.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 7:25 AM
> To: Taylor, Stacy
> Cc: 'Sweeting, John'; ARIN PPML
> Subject: RE: [ppml] Last Call for Comment: Policy Proposal 2002-6
>
>
> On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Taylor, Stacy wrote:
>
> > I think that 12 months to renumber is overly generous.
> Organizations
> > willing to request aggregatable space should be ready to
> renumber before
> > they request it.
>
> Renumbering a larger network takes some significant time. Software
> packages tie license keys to IP addresses, software has IP
> addresses hard
> coded, etc. Each of these requires project management,
> finding downtime
> windows, user announcements / user upgrades, etc. In some
> environments,
> 12 months is actually a very tight squeeze when you're
> renumbering, even
> in a fully DHCP-enabled environment for end users.
>
> Don't underestimate the work required in renumbering for
> medium and large
> end-sites. It's not fun, and I have battle scars to prove it.
>
> /cah
>
> ---
> Craig A. Huegen, Chief Network Architect C i s c o S y s t e m s
> IT Transport, Network Technology & Design || ||
> Cisco Systems, Inc., 400 East Tasman Drive || ||
> San Jose, CA 95134, (408) 526-8104 |||| ||||
> email: chuegen at cisco.com CCIE #2100 ..:||||||:..:||||||:..
>
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list