[arin-ppml] Opposed to 2010-9 and 2010-12

michael.dillon at bt.com michael.dillon at bt.com
Fri Oct 15 05:37:26 EDT 2010

> He has
> argued in the past that a mobile phone connected to a cell tower should
> get a /48 because it might have a LAN behind it. 

The mobile phone industry has virtually disappeared. Nowadays people carry
pocket computers with always-on wireless Internet access. Whether or not
those pocket computers are used for voice conversations is irrelevant.

> What I, were I an ISP, would want to do is provide my customers with a
> set of addressing capabilities at different price points.

ARIN generally does not support such things. IP addresses are not sold
and there is not cost per address associated with them. Like with QOS,
ISPs can create artificial shortages to charge higher fees in order
to solve the problem that they created. But this costs the ISP more 
to do and the guy down the street can easily undercut the price points.

> I *would* recommend to ARIN that when it allocate a /32 to a member, it
> internally allocate a shorter prefix, so that the next allocation can
> turn the prefix into a /31 or whatever. 

That is current practice of all RIRs.

-- Michael Dillon

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list