Oh well, there's an approach where one splits users into "residential" and "business", meaning that "residential" is only downloading, surfing, ... without need of providing any services "back" to the 'net. At least with IPv6 one has to rethink this position as there finally is end-to-end communication and everybody with a limited upload bandwidth can multicast his content to half of the world (crossing fingers). inetnum: 82.150.208.0 - 82.150.208.255 netname: AT-HOTZE-NET descr: hotze.com GmbH descr: DSL wholesale country: AT Our position is that we sell internet access at the IP level, a pure IP pipe - nothing less and nothing more. The customer can have his own PTR-record with a name matching his domain, he can set up a server or not. All IPs are static (no need to hassle with DHCP pools, matching IP to time&date to user for law enforcment). Every customer is served the same according to his service plan. And we don't make any decisions wether the customer is "residential" or "business" - simple as that. I won't feel happy with an ISP who wants to make this decision for me. greetings, martin AS8596 / hotze.com GmbH / Austria

-----Original Message----- Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 12:42:58 -0500 From: Steven Champeon <schampeo@hesketh.com> Subject: Re: SORBS on autopilot? To: nanog@nanog.org (...) just to pick a few. At the very least, customer-assigned blocks ought to have a SWIP and a comment showing whether they're dynamic or static, residential or business class, and so forth. A surprising example, given the paucity of such examples in the .pl TLD, is dialog.net.pl, which does exactly that:

inetnum: 87.105.24.0 - 87.105.24.255 netname: DIALOGNET descr: Static Broadband Services descr: Telefonia Dialog S.A. - Dialog Telecom country: PL

inetnum: 62.87.215.0 - 62.87.215.255 netname: DIALOGNET descr: Dynamic Broadband Services descr: Telefonia Dialog S.A. - Dialog Telecom country: PL

So, if the Poles (well, some Poles) can do it, why can't we simply end the endless back and forth over why SORBS is evil, and start adopting sane and clear naming conventions for PTRs? Given how easy it is to modify a $GENERATE statement, I should think you've spent far more energy on arguing about why you're being wronged than it would have taken to fix your problem.