North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
RE: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
- From: John van Oppen
- Date: Wed Jun 14 05:20:01 2006
We end up with customers asking for more IPs too. We just add additional subnets to the interface, perhaps they started with a /30 but now need three more IPs, we just add an additional /29 to the interface leaving both blocks.
It is not often that anything needs to be explained to the customer other than the correct subnet mask and gateway for the IPs. This makes our configs look like this for each customer vlan:
ip address 126.96.36.199 255.255.255.252
ip address 188.8.131.52 255.255.255.224 secondary
That being said, I know at least one of our transit customers does hosting exactly how you are describing. Coincidentally, this customer is also one of the customers that asked if we could "give them a class C block."
Using this strategy has never been a problem with ARIN for us, in fact I have applied for and received more space at intervals between 6 and 14 months for the last four years without any issue at all.
Von: Richard A Steenbergen [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Gesendet: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 12:18 AM
An: Christopher L. Morrow
Betreff: Re: Interesting new spam technique - getting a lot more popular.
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 04:46:31AM +0000, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
> is it really that hard to make your foudry/extreme/cisco l3 switch vlan
> and subnet??? Is this a education thing or a laziness thing? Is this
> perhaps covered in a 'bcp' (not even an official IETF thing, just a
> hosters bible sort of thing) ?
Simple: Subnets are hard, customers are stupid, and ARIN is not exactly a
hosters best friend.
When a hosting customer asks for 5 IPs today and 25 IPs tomorrow, it is
infinitely easier for the hosting folks to just slap them into /24s and
say "ok uhm you are now .69-.94" than to try and explain subnets, cidr,
reserving IP space in cidr sized blocks etc to the customer. Hosters are
also generally under-equipped in the paperwork and detailed documentation
department, so they tend to run their IP allocations into the ground while
attempting to explain their need for more space. CIDR allocations are
"wasteful" to them, especially when a customer needs to expand from 30 IPs
to 35 IPs and crosses a new boundry.
Incase you've never seen hoster configs, they generally look a little
something like this:
ip address 184.108.40.206 255.255.255.0
ip address 220.127.116.11 255.255.255.0 secondary
ip address 18.104.22.168 255.255.255.0 secondary
ip address 22.214.171.124 255.255.255.0 secondary
ip address 126.96.36.199 255.255.255.0 secondary
Anything else is quite honestly beyond 99% of hosters out there, they're
still blissfully calling these things "class c's". I've seen some truly
godawful thins configured by hosters, like chains of 3548s all linking
back to a single router interface in ways you can't even imagine.
If you made it dirt simple for them they would probably be doing something
better (I usually point folks who ask to pvlans, then take the opportunity
to make a hasty retreat while they are distracted), but otherwise they
don't see the benefit in it. Why bother configuring your router better
when you can just send your $5/hr monkey over with a redhat cd and have
them reinstall, right? :)
Richard A Steenbergen <email@example.com> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)