North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

RE: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report

  • From: Randy Bush
  • Date: Fri Sep 22 23:23:21 2000

> up getting only one /24. Then another upstream provider, quite large,
> forced another /24 upon us. When we stated we didn't need/want it, they
> said they could take it back but it was not standard practice; all DS3
> customers get a /24. Anyway... Think of all the other companies out there
> who get treated like this?

i would not make the argument that this is good, best practice, beneficial,

but i have to whine that it is *very* hard in a large provider to make it
clear to and easy for sales and provisioning folk to adequately determine
what a customer can actually justify (in an rir sense) and provision thusly.

to us it may be obvious that a residential dsl customer might have a bonkers
gadget-crazed geek population that actually warrants a /25 while an oc3
turn-up who insists on a natting firewall only needs a /29.  this is very
hard to explain to a normal human being in sales/provisioning who has to do
20-50 of them a day, is underpaid, and who is completely disconnected from
the physics and consequences of address allocation policy.