On Tue Jun 29, 2004 at 12:15:33PM -0400, Matthew Crocker wrote:
From my understanding the customer has their own IP space allocated by ARIN and has had that space for over a year. They have already had adequate time to transition to their own space. The Internet routing table should not suffer due to the laziness of one customer. I can see if NAC kicked the customer off their network the *may* have a case.
Without getting into the rights and wrongs of this case, this did flag up a couple of things that I noticed in the document: 1) They say that they are hindered in their renumbering by not being able to get a large enough block of addresses from ARIN (I forget the exact wording). Does this mean that NAC were lax with their IP allocation policy and let the customer have more addresses than ARIN policies would otherwise allow? If their new allocation is really the biggest issue, why not just go back and ask ARIN more nicely? 2) They say they have to write custom software to allow the renumbering. Is this related to them having to fit into a smaller address block? Otherwise, I don't see why there's such a big issue about having to write *new* software because of an IP renumber. Simon -- Simon Lockhart | Tel: +44 (0)1628 407720 (x(01)37720) | Si fractum Technology Manager | Fax: +44 (0)1628 407701 (x(01)37701) | non sit, noli BBC Internet Ops | Email: Simon.Lockhart@bbc.co.uk | id reficere BBC Technology, Maiden House, Vanwall Road, Maidenhead. SL6 4UB. UK