[ppml] those pesky users...
stephen at sprunk.org
Tue Mar 27 10:12:50 EDT 2007
Thus spake "Leo Vegoda" <leo.vegoda at icann.org>
> I'm confused, I didn't think ARIN's IPv4 policy promoted the use of NAT.
> Did I misunderstand?
The only direct mention of private addressing is 4.3.5, but the
justification requirements -- and the difficulty of getting customers to
provide the necessary information -- effectively promote the use of NAT.
Several ISPs I've gotten connectivity from will automatically assign a /24
or smaller (business) or /32 (residential), regardless of customer need,
based on the assumption you're going to be using NAT; if you want more than
that, they make you fill out endless paperwork, pay additional fees, etc.
There appears to be an unspoken assumption that if you give people small
enough blocks, that's automatically "efficient utilization" because you
can't use a block "inefficiently" if it's so small it's only useful for NAT.
While that isn't ARIN policy per se, it's the logical effect of the policies
and fee schedule, and I think that it's at least somewhat intentional. We
are encouraging NAT by our actions, if not by our words.
Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS --Isaac Asimov
More information about the ARIN-PPML