[arin-ppml] IPV4 allocations
dwise at gni.com
Sun Jan 4 14:41:29 EST 2009
We hosting companies have options? Maybe on the small hosting ($49 a month server or virtual hosting category) but in the enterprise or large scale hosting we have these guys who think they are smart as customers asking for more IP space than they can possibly justify.
Abusers perpetuate their businesses while those of us that try to follow ARIN guidelines and best practices for IP conservation lose revenue. It's part ignorance and part greed that continues the abuse of IP assignments today.
I have a prospective client today that wants a /24 in space (just because he wants it). My competitors are giving him the IP space he can't justify at all. Significant monthly revenue I lose because I don't have a mechanism to report the abuse (does me very little good after I lose the deal… so I don’t really care how to report) and I can't do anything about someone giving him more IP's than he can use for the next 3 years.
Don't get me wrong, idiot IT Managers who ask for more space than they need just to "feel" better should be out of a job and I sure as hell don't want to help these guys get what they want. But, how can I keep generating revenue when I have to turn away otherwise good business because someone else is using abusive IP allocation practices as their competitive edge? So the competitive edge goes to the abusers...
In this thread there have been a few people chime in about the business impact. I personally feel ARIN should make a much bigger effort to campaign "IP Allocation Literacy" to new and existing netblock holders. Most of the ISP's will reduce the abusive practices somewhat as I have some faith that the majority are just illiterate about what the rules are. Nothing we do with "FIX" the IPv4 space (unless you have found some new way to do math) but literacy and policy helps with confidence in the organization controlling them and will help lengthen the life of the existing space and possibly help companies stay in business that follow the rules and keep this from becoming the wild west.
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Artur (eBoundHost) [artur at eboundhost.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 5:38 AM
To: Michael Sinatra
Cc: ppml at arin.net; mpetach at gmail.com
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IPV4 allocations
>What is a "shared block" in this context?
In the hosting industry, we have an option. We can allocate an ip addr for each website or we can host thousands of websites from a single 'shared' ip. A Unique IP is handed out to customers who have special needs such as anonymous ftp and ssl certs. There is a small premium to cover the extra management and arin fees ($2 per month).
This is a model that works well my industry and I wonder why its not implemented with ISPs.
The vast majority of customers would have no idea about NAT and it would have no effect on their experience. And those that would genuinely need a publicly visible or static ip should be able to request an allocation.
Understand where I'm coming from, I'm not trying to make policy that nobody wants but trying to understand it.
If we genuinely have a problem with the ips running out then options have to be considered. And if changing out current customers is a big problem then maybe the new sign ups should be handled differently. Whatever it is, saying that this is a patch and throwing hands in the air and saying 'if we don't go ipv6 right away, its not going to solve anything' is not the right way. Its not a all or nothing issue.
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML