Hi, On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 10:28:55AM +0200, Pekka Savola wrote:
Let's assume an organization would qualify for e.g., /25 address allocation. When obtaining Internet connectivity, the ISP gives two offers, for example: - 100 EUR/mo for a /27 - 200 EUR/mo for a /25 (otherwise the terms are same, and the technical implementation is the same.)
I recall this is not allowed. Are there any recourses in this kind situations? Threaten the ISP with LIR audit? ;-)
Actually we decided on one of the last RIPE meetings to obsolete the "charging by local IRs" document, because the majority seemed to believe that "the market will rule this" - if one ISP charges too much, people will go and find an alternative. Personally, I can see a reason why (getting) a /25 might be more expensive than a /27. Usually customers are pretty sloppy in documenting their need - and figuring out why they need 16...32 IPs is usually less time- consuming than figuring out why they need 64...128 IPs ("do they have subnets? virtual hosting with SSL? is it because the 'need to have it immediately! *stomp foot*'?) - so it's sort of "charging by effort", not "charging by amount of address space". Of course it's hard to see the underlying rationale in a specific ISP's offer from the outside. (OTOH, the whole industry is so NAT-damaged that more and more ISPs have serious issues understanding the concept of "assigning a subnet of reasonable size" to end-users. *sigh*. Time for IPv6. Really.) Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 71007 (66629) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299