Let them submit the IP justification form, I would like to read how spammers justify their IP usage and I would really like to see how RIR would take it.
*Interetesting* Regards, Aftab A. Siddiqui On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Jason Baugher <ja...@thebaughers.com>wrote: > On 6/20/2011 7:44 AM, Steve Richardson wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Jared Mauch<ja...@puck.nether.net> >> wrote: >> >>> On Jun 20, 2011, at 8:30 AM, Bret Clark wrote: >>> >>> Personally I would charge them for the /24 too, makes users think twice >>>> about the need for a block that large. >>>> >>> We do charge them for addresses already and cost doesn't come into >> play. We charge for assignments shorter than /28 to discourage IP >> hogs. >> >> I would also give them a /64 per lan (alt: broadcast domain) as well to >>> allow them to start working with IPv6 for their email. >>> >>> - Jared >>> >> They have inquired about IPv6 already, but it's only gone so far as >> that. I would gladly give them a /64 and be done with it, but my >> concern is that they are going to want several /64 subnets for the >> same reason and I don't really *think* it's a legitimate reason. Bear >> in mind that "legitimate" in this context is referring to the >> justification itself, not their business model. >> >> Thanks, >> steve >> >> Did everyone miss that the customer didn't request a /24, they requested > a "/24s worth in even more dis-contiguous blocks". I can only think of one > reason why a customer would specifically ask for that. They are concerned > that they'll get blacklisted. They're hoping if they do, it will be a small > block of many rather than one entire block. > > When customers make strange requests without giving a good explanation, I > have to assume they're up to something. > > Jason > >
