Re: Address space for individuals
- Date: Thu, 19 May 1994 20:20:30 +0900
- Return-path: <>
If you don't mind some comments from a person a little separated from
Europe (but you did mention world-wide):
JPNIC and APNIC have recieved many requests for addresses for very
small numbers of hosts (e.g. 2 or 3). This is a result of firewalls
apparently being more popular in this region than elsewhere. In
addition, I believe there have been requests to JPNIC from individuals
for address space for similar situations as you have experienced.
The response to these requests have generally been the allocation of a
single class C network.
I personally feel it would be highly useful if sub-C allocations were
allowed from within service provider address space (only - renumbering
individual sites is obviously trivial) in order to get higher address
space utilization rates. I'm supposed to be writing a proposal for
JPNIC to address this very issue, but I seem to have lost my copious
spare time...
Cheers,
-drc
--------
>Local IRs,
>
>I planned to attend the Local IR WG meeting at RIPE last Tuesday, but
>the meeting was moved to yesterday, the same time as the Mbone WG
>meeting (where I had to be for "chairing reasons"). And I forgot all
>about it...
>
>As Last Resort IR for The Netherlands I received a request for address
>space (one C network) from an individual. The person requesting address
>space tells me he has several machines at home able to talk IP and he
>wants to interconnect them.
>
>Since he has plans to connect his LAN at home to the Internet some day in
>the future he asks for an official IP network number (which means RFC1597
>is of no help in this case).
>
>IMHO, this is a question which we will see in an increasingly frequency
>in the near future. Think of what happens if IP functionality is built in
>to Microsoft software...
>
>I'd like to know whether you have received requests like this before,
>and how you aproached this issue, since I think "we all" should have a
>common attitude in Europe (better: world-wide) on this.
>Thanks for your concern.
>
>__
>
>Erik-Jan.
