|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: IP renumbering timeframe
As I already pointed out, I never passed a packet to Cogent. They were ready to provide service before I was ready to start using it. I paid setup, 1st month service, and then some. And your computer analogy is totally ridiculous. The only "service" I ever actually used was a /22 of IP space. A /19 from ARIN is $2500 for a year, so if Cogent wanted a couple hundred for my continued use of the /22 for 90 days I would have happily paid it. Ralph Doncaster principal, IStop.com div. of Doncaster Consulting Inc. On Mon, 6 May 2002, Scott Granados wrote: > Well don't forget its a two way street. If a customer isn't paying > their bill then its the provider getting screwed. There is no insentive > or in fact good reason to be helpful to this person. I won't be helpful > to someone who decides to switch services and not pay me, ever! On the > other hand if they are reasonable and if there is a friendly split both > sides are more likely bo be reasonable. If someone buys a product say a > computer from you, and doesn't pay you will you still service them? > Better still if I'm the telephone company and you stiff me for x# of > dollars and switch to another carrier do you really expect me to release > the same telephone number for you so that you can switch uneffected. > Its totally unreasonable to assume when someone isn't paid for their > services that they will allow you to continue using their resources. > And we're only talking a /20 here not to large a task. > > On Mon, 6 May > 2002, Ralph Doncaster wrote: > > > > > But it would seem that given the attitude many have expressed here of "if > > they're not your customer any more, screw 'em.", then relying on the honor > > system is unwise. > > > > Ralph Doncaster > > principal, IStop.com > > div. of Doncaster Consulting Inc. > > > > On Mon, 6 May 2002, Daniel Golding wrote: > > > > > > > > Indeed, you have hit upon one of the significant weaknesses of the ARIN IP > > > registry system - that it relies largely upon the integrity of it's members, > > > in order to properly issue and conserve address space. ARIN is largely based > > > upon the honor system, with one "check" on the potentially dishonest being a > > > general unwilling to be branded an IP address cheat or poor internet > > > citizen. > > > > > > Of course, should one choose to be somewhat less upstanding of an internet > > > citizen, posting one's intentions to do so on NANOG, frequented as it is by > > > various ARIN people, might not be such a good idea. > > > > > > - Daniel Golding > > > > > > > Ralph Doncaster angrily ruminated.... > > > > > > > > What it tells me is I should have wasted enough space to consume 8 /24s > > > > long ago, so I could get a /20 directly from ARIN. I assign IPs to > > > > customers very conservatively. Multiple DSL customers with static IPs are > > > > put on a shared subnet instead of one subnet per customer. I easily could > > > > have used 8 /24's a year ago and still conformed to ARIN rules. At the > > > > time I was only using 3 /24's. We recently reached 8 /24s and applied to > > > > ARIN a few weeks ago for a /20, but it sounds like the best thing to do is > > > > to use IPs in the most inefficient way possible (while still conforming to > > > > ARIN policy) in order to quickly qualify for PI space. > > > > > > > > -Ralph > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
|