Internic address allocation policy

No, I don't think that is anything near what he is saying. IMHO, what I
read between the lines is this in fact... We have all been having to deal
with this. Many of us have been in Matt's position, and what we have
learned is that in fact, the IP people at the Internic are in fact that,
Imagine my amazement when I met Kim in person and found out she
didn't have fangs, horns, and a string with dried Network Engineers' ears
'round her neck. In fact, she is a very nice person doing a very difficult
job. She has a set of rules she must live by. she has to be impartial,
and show no preferences.

The things that Matt is running into sounds just like the things that
a good number of us have run into. The end being, if you follow the
requirements (sign an NDA, EVERY lawyer of worth knows what those
are), you get the addresses you need. So maybe you have to deal with
a /19 here, an /18 there, and a few /17's before you get a /16. It's a
rough life, but I doubt anyone is going to jump on your case for creating
two routes where only one would have existed before. That extra
route is going to fall in the noise level as everyone and thier brother

If route table size was an argument that the Internic was going to
blindly accept, it would have already happened. What your lawyers will
eventually find out, is that you are being treated in exactly the same
manner as everyone else. At this point, you're going to be looking at
a suit that will run for a couple of years without any sign of closure.

My suggestion is to seriously sit down, and evaluate your current
assignment of IP's and make sure they are allocated in a sane and
efficient manner. If they are not, renumber, if they are, swip. Then
create an engineering plan that runs a good distance into the
future, and supply that plan to the IP group at the Internic. I think
you might find the way less rocky at that point.

Again, this is all my humble opinion, and not based on any semblance
of knowledge on the internal functions of the Internic. I'll leave that to
Kim. (*wave* Hi Kim)

Chris A. Icide
Nap.Net, L.L.C.

Shurely, NIC's persons always seems to us _bad_ and _unfriendly_
and _too buroctaric_ etc... but it's their work, they have not
another chance... All we can ask is to _reserve_ something for the
future use, or some better laws, not more. This (discussed there) case
is obvious - if somebody need address space what's the problem to start from

We have the same problems in Europe, and RIPE's stuff are blamed daily,
but everybody know we'll keep in blame any other NIC just the same