🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <6eule5$st8$2@winter.news.erols.com>,
Jim Pettipas <jinks1@x.erols.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>> When the service started the ADSL lines used static IP addressing and
>>>> everyone was happy. Then they decided that they would start using NAT to
>>>> have a type of dynamic IP addressing, then no one was happy. Now they
>want
>>>> to sell us the right to have a static IP address again for the low cost
>of
>>>> 100 dollars. They expect people to pay 100 dollars extra a month so that
>we
>>>> can be privledged enough to have the same service that we received to
>begin
>>>> with.
>>>
>>>Actually, that may be ARIN's fault.
>>
>>The revocation of static addresses from those who don't have 24x7 access is
>>a policy issue that may be attributed to ARIN.
>>
>>The charging of $100/month for a static address is NOT attributable to
>ARIN.
>
>
>FYI, my ISP charges $75 a year for a static IP address.

Any ISP which is charging SPECIFICALLY for a static address should, IMHO, 
be reported to ARIN as such.  You might not see an immediate reaction
to this, but the next time that ISP tries to justify their address
allocation policies to obtain more addresses.............

This is an issue which I believe needs wide debate within ARIN.  I am
strongly against ISPs doing this for a number of reasons, not the least
of which is that it leads directly to the violation of the actual rules
for assignment of address space (and the granting of future requests for
more).

Static addresses have been pretty much banned for non-24x7 dial
customers who have no valid technical need for them (ie: not a routed
connection), and granting them has been given as a SPECIFIC reason for 
refusal to make additional allocations.

I fundamentally think that this sucks, but if the rules are going to be this
way, then they need to be UNIVERSALLY enforced against ALL ISPs, large or
small, regardless of who they are or who they know.

Note that this is true regardless of whether you paid for the address or not.

ISPs playing this game as an attempt to extort more money from people and
circumvent the allocation guidelines should be reported to ARIN for two
reasons - (1) you have no reason to pay for the addresses (the cost per
address to the ISP even if they have to get an ARIN membership is on the 
order of a one-time fee of $0.02 per IP number), and (2) circumventing the
rules on allocations is asking to have your next request turned down flat.

--
-- 
Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin
http://www.mcs.net/          | T1's from $600 monthly / All Lines K56Flex/DOV
			     | NEW! Corporate ISDN Prices dropped by up to 50%!
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| EXCLUSIVE NEW FEATURE ON ALL PERSONAL ACCOUNTS
Fax:   [+1 312 803-4929]     | *SPAMBLOCK* Technology now included at no cost