[address-policy-wg] Re: [ncc-services-wg] Request Forms: upda ted and available on LIR Portal
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ncc-services-wg] Request Forms: updated and available on LIR Portal
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ncc-services-wg] Request Forms: upda ted and available on LIR Portal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Bornhorst, Ludger
Ludger.Bornhorst at telekom.de
Fri Sep 19 13:31:45 CEST 2003
Hi Christian, > The question is how complex an evaluation must be? The facts needed to > evaluate a normal IP requests are simply the number of nodes needing a > public IP address. In case one or more nodes needs more than 1 IP address > then documentation is needed to explain why to exceed the normal rules, also > in case the expected growth pr. year exceeds 100%. Yes, but I don't have any problem to ask endusers about their (planned) hardware and to document their needs in the way we've done it since several years now, like "We have 20 PC's, 5 routers, 200 dial-in-ports and so on..." This general information will (in most cases) be sufficient to evaluate IP requests. > It would of course be easier to falsify the number of nodes than to falsify > the documentation, but in case an end user intends to falsify information in > order to get more IP addresses than justifyable, then I don't see any easy > way to prevent this. Right, but there are still enduser who don't know about classless addressing. That means they are asking for "Class-C" nets just because they think its hip. So I think it's responsibility of the LIR's to tell this endusers about CIDR and its outcomes. And, yes I agree: If an enduser wants to cheat at you, I can't see a way to prevent this. > I would find it reasonable if larger requests still required some form of > documentation, for example /24 and above. But it would of course still be > very important for all LIRs to stress that the information received from the > enduser must be correct. ACK! This way it would be possible to serve the main part of the customers at a simple level and only ask reasonable questions (hardware documentation) if the request exceeds a certain level. I would like to stress that the /24 border should be the maximum limit of "freedom" given here. Maybe it's better to decrease this "HW-documentation-border" down to /25 or /26 ? What do you think? mit freundlichen Gruessen/with best regards Ludger Bornhorst ______________________________________________________________________ Deutsche Telekom AG T-Com Headquarters Network Information Center Ammerlander Heerstr. 138, D-26129 Oldenburg Hotline +49 441 234 4581 (phone) +49 800 3301180 +49 441 234 4589 (fax) +49 800 3301179 ludger.bornhorst at telekom.de (mail) dk.call-center at telekom.de
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ncc-services-wg] Request Forms: updated and available on LIR Portal
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ncc-services-wg] Request Forms: upda ted and available on LIR Portal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]