Any org viewing ASNs as a scarce resource is wasting money keeping ASNs. Any org that financially broken will probably not continue to pay it's bills in the long run.
I believe these are the exception and not the rule. Like I said, the long-term answer to this is 32bit ASNs. I don't think hoarding will account for a significant portion of the ASN space in the long run.
Owen
--On Friday, November 19, 2004 6:48 AM -0600 "J.A. Terranson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 08:28:55 +0100, Jeroen Massar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On Tue, 2004-11-16 at 08:18 +0100, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > On 2004-11-16, at 02.24, Owen DeLong wrote: > > > ASNs issued today are subject to annual renewal. While this is a > > small charge and doesn't go up based on the number of ASNs, so, not > > 100% effective at reclaiming all unused resources, it does, at least, > > reclaim resources in use by defunct organizations that are no longer > > paying the maintenance for them.
Yes, but what about the (dozens, hundreds?) of entities that are hoarding (and renewing) ASNs? These unused resources are gone forever - since they are seen as a scarce resource, they are kept artificially alive (even though the orgs know full well there is neither a use nor a justification for them).
//Alif
-- If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
pgpfB9N909P1r.pgp
Description: PGP signature
