Fixed Boundary (/29) Assignments
Thor-Henrik Kvandahl thk at nextra.com
Thu Feb 8 12:48:32 CET 2001
I agree with Bjarne. The proposed /29 assignment is wasteful. DSL customers should be dealt with as all the other. One official dynamically assigned /32 (no NAT here) pr. customer should do it for the majority of the "non business" customers. And if some of them needs to be assigned official addresses they must fill in "the form". And if some providers market DSL products which include 8, 16, 32 or more IP addresses, this is OK as long as these customers document their needs. I also think the RIR's should take notice of this practice and perhaps focus their audits on these providers. -- Regards, Thor-Henrik Kvandahl Nextra AS On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Bjarne Carlsen wrote: > My $0,02: > > As I stated on the RIPE-meeting, one should consider the goal of > preservation most carefully when contemplating any standard assignments for > specific services. The proposed /29 assignment seems to me, (and I work for > a cable provider), to be wasteful. > > I vote for the second option. Let the LIR ask for current and expected use. > > Rgds > Bjarne Carlsen > Fakse Municipality > >
[ lir-wg Archives ]