On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
I think you follow Nanog, and the recent lawsuit filed ove
renumbering. Plaintiff claimed they didn't have enough time to
renumber.
What does one stupid company after themselve creating situation where
they forced their biggest client out and then wanting to hurt their
former client as much as possible, but can't because of court order,
and now crying "wolf" (did they look at the mirror?) in public has
anything to do with standards for renumbering?
I took a look at the NANOG list archives. William is putting it
very mildly here.
This related to a pleading for a Temporary Restraining Order
to protect the customer of the ISP for a short period of time
in order to allow them to perform an orderly transition.
My apologies. Everyting that is obvious to me isn't obvious to everyone.
Plainly, if you have more things to migrate, it will take longer to
migrate, and thus it will take longer to renumber, and you will have more
lawsuits and/or ISP will be forced to provide more time to renumber. This
reduces the amount of IP Address space that is available since a greater
amount of space is in transition longer and thus can't be used.
Or you tell your users to use smtp.example.com as the address
for outgoing email service. Then you write an SPF rule to state
that the address smtp.example.com maps to is a legitimate
address.
Job done now and forever.
Or you just reject Sender-ID and keep the renumbering problem the same as
it is. Now and forever.