Not only do we create "less usable" v4 address space, if these guys had a clue, and what ever you think of them with $$ envolved clue will be found... they will just add more IP's from diffrent block, further 'wasting' IP space.
-jim On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Martin Hannigan <mar...@theicelandguy.com> wrote: > >From a strictly operational perspective: > > The only concern that I had with that request was with the v4 address > blocking. That ought to be rethought in the grand scheme of things i.e. v4 > exhaustion. There's a reasonable case to make regarding not tainting hosts > or specific blocks in this manner. Creating "less usable" v4 resources as we > approach exhaustion is not helpful, IMHO. > > Best Regards, > > Martin > > > > > >> 2009/5/4 John Levine <jo...@iecc.com>: >>> >>>> Not withstanding the legality of such an order, how would one >>>>> operationally enforce that order? >>>>> >>>> >>>> The order has a list of IP addresses, so I expect the ISPs will just >>>> block those IPs in routers somewhere. >>>> >>>> Since offshore online gambling is equally illegal everywhere in the >>>> U.S., the ISPs have little reason to limit the block to Minnesota >>>> customers, giving them a lot of latitude in where they implement the >>>> block. >>>> >>> > > > -- > Martin Hannigan mar...@theicelandguy.com > p: +16178216079 > Power, Network, and Costs Consulting for Iceland Datacenters and Occupants >