2011/6/20 Leo Bicknell <bickn...@ufp.org>: > In a message written on Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 08:01:24AM -0700, JC Dill wrote: >> I would use this answer in reply to the customer, and ask them to >> (specifically) justify their request for the discontiguous blocks.
That's like asking them to state the obvious... > Or, just don't offer it. Make them fit in one block, giving them > 3 months to renumber into a single, larger block if necessary. Well, forcing a periodic renumbering whenever adress gets freed and there's a potential agregation is a good thing. It should be stated in service agreements, IMHO. > It sends a strong message you're willing to give them all the space > they need, but won't help them evade RBL's. Unless many contiguous blocks are assigned as different objects : a RBL must NOT presume of one end-user's inetnum unless it has been cathed doing nasty things AND didn't comply to abuse@ requests. But most RBL managers are shitheads anyway, so help them evade, that'll be one more proof of spamhaus &co. uselessness and negative impact on the Internet's best practices. -- Jérôme Nicolle
