50 States of ARIN

[Jim Fleming]

On Thursday, February 27, 1997 7:33 PM, Philip J. Nesser II[SMTP:pjnesser at martigny.ai.mit.edu] wrote:
@ Jim Fleming supposedly said:
@ > 
@ > 
@ > Can ARIN discussion list members comment on using
@ > 140.0.0.0 to 190.0.0.0 for 50 clones of the InterNIC
@ > to allocate /18 blocks to ISPs in the United States ?
@ > 
@ > @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@ 
@ Jim,
@ 
@ Now I am convinced that you have really gone over the deep end.  I think
@ that the thousands of companies who have addresses assigned from those
@ blocks would go pretty much go insane if you tried to take their
@ addresses.  
@ 
@ Try and look at the way classful IP addresses where allocated and hence put
@ in the database.  (try doing a whois on 140.X.0.0 {1<X<255} to view
@ reality)
@ 
@ If you mean IPv8 addresses feel free to give every state a /8.  In fact you
@ probably should allocate a /8 for every country too in anticipation of wide
@ scale deployment of IPv8.
@ 
@ --->  Phil
@ 
@ 

Thanks for your comments.

Assigning blocks to a registry for management does NOT
give away people's addresses. It places those addresses
under the management of that registry.

As an example, you or your company could be assigned
the 192.X.X.X TWD for "management" and clean-up. That
would not immediately change anything. As a REGISTRY
doing MANAGEMENT you would not start routing on
whatever 192.X.X.X address you desired.

Instead, you would start proper record keeping and
transfer records, etc. You would MANAGE the block.

REGISTRIES manage blocks, they do not route them.

--
Jim Fleming
Unir Corporation

e-mail:
JimFleming at unety.net
JimFleming at unety.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)