On 12/15/11 13:43 , Leo Bicknell wrote: > In a message written on Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 01:36:32PM -0800, David Conrad > wrote: >> ARIN's job (well, beyond the world travel, publishing comic books, handing >> out raffle prizes, etc.) is to allocate and register addresses according to >> community-defined documented policies. I had thought new allocations are >> based on demonstrated need. The fact that addresses are in use would seem to >> suggest they're needed. As I've said, I haven't been following ARIN's policy >> discussions -- can you point me to the policy that says allocations can be >> denied because you happened to have (demonstrably ill-advisedly) used the >> wrong bit patterns in setting up your network? > > The problem is that "in use" means different things to differnet > folks. > > ifconfig em0 inet 10.0.0.1 255.0.0.0 > > I'm now using 16 million IP addresses at home. ARIN policy does > not allow me to get 16 million public IP addresses as a result, > based on the 1 machine I have configured at the moment. > > In the case at hand we don't know if the original poster configured > up /16's on p2p links for two hosts each, or if they have an actual > host up and pingable at every single IP address. ARIN has a duty to the
We know rather alot about the original posters' business, it has ~34 million wireless subscribers in north america. I think it's safe to assume that adequate docuementation could be provided. > community to ask these questions, because otherwise anyone could > fabricate a "need" for as many addresses as they want. > > It would seem the original poster and ARIN have a disagrement in this > case as to how many IP addresses are required to support their needs. > Perhaps incomplete information was provided, perhaps ARIN staff got it > wrong. No one on NANOG has enough information to know either way. >