On Mon, Oct 12, 1998 at 06:16:06PM +1300, Joe Abley wrote:
True. The lowest tier of membership is $4000 US - and if you're not a member, the IP addresses come at the bargain price of $1 US each, minimum order 8192. I don't think anybody actually pays for IP addresses without being a member. Nobody sane, anyway ;)
Oh, no doubt about it - becoming a member is cheaper. Also, if you look at the fine print, the $8192 charge is a MINIMUM charge, even if they don't give you /19, they might decide you only need /21 in which case its tough luck. You also have to pay $0.10/address maintainence fee each year, which isn't all that bad, but if you had /18 or bigger, membership is then cheaper.
I was wondering whether, in the interests of the clean up and longer-term freeing-up of the end-user networks out of the NZGATE blocks, APNIC might legitimise the delegations without charge. Stranger things have been known.
Pretty tricky, since to do it right, APNIC would need to find a /16 or larger block of address space, have everybody renumber over to it, then revoke what's presently in use, something I would argue is probably worth doing, but many people simply won't agree with that. The present address space is too add-hoc and messy, I noticed tweaking ACLs on a router a few months back, we have a /24 hole thats been there for about two years or more, which initially moved to telecom then telstra. In the same token, we have /24s in use which have done more or less the same thing (I think I've only got one left now, there were several). Ideally, I'll dump the /24s in use, and routes surrounding the `holes' for the sake of simplicity. Some people don't have the luxury of being able to do this, however, one Auckland provider I know of, has at last count, about 8 or 9 /24 address going down their wire - all allocated in a more or less adhoc fashion because they came with clients who either moved from other providers or applied (and got) the addresses themselves. So the issue is more sticky than this... if we allow people to take the networks for them for some period of time, thats the smallest network we should allow here? We have plenty of customers on /26 or smaller networks, which I would argue should renumber because its not a big job, but some might disagree... Even a renumber of /24 is not too much to ask for (I think), but certainly a renumber of /20 probably isn't going happen over night. So - where does one draw the line?
Whilst its not the national debt, its still a little too high to sneak past someone under the category `morning tea and biscuits' money.
:)
Actually... I'm told Proctor and Gamble can and have done just this, so maybe it does work. -cw --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog