Fixed Boundary (/29) Assignments
Neil J. McRae neil at COLT.NET
Thu Feb 8 18:31:58 CET 2001
> This debate sounds very like the static v dynamic IP debate for dialups. > The people saying "NAT is good enough" are like the people saying > "dialup customers don't need static IP". Well, such people are wrong. I don't think anyone is sitting on the extreme side of the fence. To use your example, its fair to say that most dialup customers don't need static IP, and those that do should get what they need. > My opinion: it is not RIPE's job to restrict the type of service that an > ISP provides in the name of "IP conservation". Conservation is > important, but it is done by ensuring good practice, not by imposing > arbitrary rules that prevent ISPs from providing innovative services. Thats what we're discussing. :-) > I'm agnostic on the /29 proposal, though I suspect it will save time and > effort all round. But residential ADSL customers should be able to get > reasonable amounts of IP space (and /30 is *not* reasonable) without > significant pain. As I said anyone who needs more than 1 IP address should really be able to justify it. Regards, Neil.
[ lir-wg Archives ]