[ppml] those pesky users...

Stephen Sprunk 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 mailing list