Help: HOWTO buy IP address blocks from ARIN?

[Mark Komarinski]

IPv6?

On January 13, 2015 1:29:04 PM EST, Joshua Judson Rosen <rozzin at hackerposse.com> wrote:
>On January 9, 2015 5:56:43 PM EST, John Abreau wrote:
>>
>>What are your project's needs that explicitly require 4K distinct
>>public
>>addresses and that cannot function using private addresses and NAT
>>instead?
>
>'Project' is a geographically-distributed tech company with a bunch of
>frequently-mobile sub-networks where at least one end of any given
>'internal' connection actually needs to be going out from behind
>someone else's network.
>
>There's certainly a chance that, say, our VPN or LAN addresses won't
>conflict with any of the arbitrarily-addressed host networks where the
>VPN endpoints reside, but we'd really rather have a routing scheme that
>'will work' as opposed to something that 'might work'.
>
>1k addresses go to a main-office LAN; the rest of them basically go to
>site offices. All of these things have the aforementioned routing
>constraints.
>
>"Just buy a block of IP addresses that are actually guaranteed
>routable" is the solution that I've seen in place at all of my former
>companies, though I've never been the one to make it happen before.
>
>How would you do it?
>
>>On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Lloyd Kvam <python at venix.com>
>wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2015-01-08 at 17:26 -0500, Joshua Judson Rosen wrote:
>>> > Anyone here ever been through the process of procuring an IP block
>>> > from ARIN?
>>>
>>> Actually from my upstream ISP (UUNET) many years ago.  I was
>>requesting
>>> a /21.  The requirements were essentially the same back then.
>>>
>>> You're requesting 4K addresses.  They want to know that 1K will be
>>used
>>> right now and that at least 2K will be in use within a year.  If the
>>> only way you can use up that number of addresses is by allocating
>one
>>> thousand /30's they will turn you down.  They are basically looking
>>for
>>> individual addresses, but you can count the lost addresses from your
>>> subnet scheme.
>>>
>>> > I'm trying to interpret the requirements they give for an
>>> > "end-user initial assignment", which are:
>>> >
>>> >     * provide data demonstrating at least a 25% utilization rate
>of
>>the
>>> >       requested block immediately upon assignment
>>> >
>>> >     * provide data demonstrating at least a 50% utilization rate
>of
>>the
>>> >       requested block within one year
>>> >
>>> > .. and maybe I'm just being dense, but it's not entirely obvious
>to
>>me
>>> > what "utilization rate" actually means here: do they mean
>>"sub-blocks
>>> > allocated to specific subnets with some-definition-of-minimal
>>waste",
>>> > or do they mean "individual addresses actually, specifically
>>assigned"?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I'm trying to rationalise a /20 block, because I can't seem to
>>> > partition the space such that I end up with < 50% allocated
>>immediately
>>> > or < 75% allocated over the next year; but if I count up the
>actual
>>> > nodes that I expect to exist on all of my subnets, those counts
>are
>>> > definitely short of both the `25% utilization immediately' and
>>> > `50% utilization within one year' figures.
>>> >
>>> > If I'm really supposed to be counting individual addresses
>>> > and not summing subnet sizes, what am I likely to be doing wrong
>>here?
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>gnhlug-discuss mailing list
>gnhlug-discuss at mail.gnhlug.org
>http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20150113/9b21974c/attachment.html