too many routes

[Jeff Williams]

Valdis and all

Valdis.Kletnieks at VT.EDU wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 09 Sep 1997 23:41:50 EDT, Jon Lewis said:
> > How do the rules of rfc2050 apply though when you have a hierarchy of
> > providers and customers, where often the customer is a provider?  i.e.
> > picture the food chain I'm part of.  UUNet provides a T1 and 2 /20 blocks
> > to FDT (an ISP).  Should UUNet give FDT address space based on the 25%/50%
> > rule or the "slow-start" procedure?  FDT provides T1 service to several
> 
> That's for UUNet and for you to decide.  Remember, the *REGISTRY* only
> did *one* allocation - to UUNet.  It does so based on RFC2050 (plus
> whatever other policies they create above and beyond that).  What UUNet
> and FDT do is market-driven.  It is *intended* that they sub-delegate
> address space to their customers, possibly repeatedly (as in your case).

  Where on ARIN's site is there a clear and percise policy stating
that RFC2050 can be suplemented as per your statment, "(plus
whatever other policies they create above and beyond that)" ?

  In section 2 of RFC2050 a buisness plane is not mentioned directly
as a qualification for any allocation.  This effects new ISP's 
especially regional ones and smaller.   
> 
> On Wed, 10 Sep 97 02:53:05, Joseph T. Klein said:
> 
> > If I am to build a network to 5 major meet  points and contract with
> > UUNET, and MCI for transit, why should I put up with the InetrNIC or
> > ARIN telling me  that  I must  get   a block  of addresses from   an
> > upstream??! How the do you expect to establish new backbones without
> > a loophole for new providers to get a /19 >and  an ASN? Even to anty
> > up to do this, we are in the 1 Million $$$ range.
> 
> To run a sucessful startup, you gotta be capitalized. Life sucks.  I am
> sure that *IF YOU COME IN WITH A BUSINESS PLAN*, including capital sources,
> projected hookups, and the like, the guys at ARIN will be willing to listen.
> But seriously - anybody who's shelling out for interconnects at 5 different
> meet points had *BETTER* have enough business lined up to fill a /19,
> or you're going to go *broke* shelling out to UUNET and MCI for the lines.

  Hell we are capitolized to the tune of $12m and yet I have been told
on this list that that will not have any effect on weather I can recieve
a /19 or not.  That RFC2050 will be the basis on any allocation.  So
I have no idea where you get this information.  If the ARIN guys are
willing to listen it is news to me.  Kim Hubbard, can you comment here?

  And really this is not a sound basis for determining allocations. 
There
should either be a clear and percise policy backed by a modification to
RFC2050 amended with such language that you mention or we are just
playing little favorites game here.  That is not good buisness nor
good for smaller communities which wish to have their own ISP's.
> 
> A /19 is only 8K addresses. If you don't have a business plan to get
> enough to fill a /19 (and due to subnetting etc, you may be able to
> get close to full on 4K actual allocated or even less), not getting a /19
> from ARIN is the least of your worries. Cash Flow is probably the biggest.

  This would usually be the case, I must admit.  But not in all cases,
but I would agree most.  However that is really besides th point really.
(See above my comments).
> 
> --
>                                 Valdis Kletnieks
>                                 Computer Systems Senior Engineer
>                                 Virginia Tech
> 
>     ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>                Part 1.2   Type: application/pgp-signature

Regards,
-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. IEG. INC. 
Phone :913-294-2375 (v-office)
E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com