[[lug] DSL, static IPs and the hunt for red october.]
duke at firstworld.net
Fri Aug 25 19:04:27 MDT 2000
Again, STOP intentionally misrepresenting what I have said!!
I never said that either "NSI or register.com allocate IP addresses".
As I clearly stated, I acquired license to both the IP@ C-block and
the domain name through an ISP some years back. That these were
legally and logically (not to mention functionally) related is not
subject to argument (In the real world, we call these things "facts.)
All I ever claimed for any other entity is that I now continue that
registration for $35 per year.
Your remarks are not only demonstrably false, but also known to be so
by you, making them lies, but the reference to "trolling" is beyond the
pale, so far removed from professionalism as to be unworthy of
further comment; I was responding to a list member's request for
>IP addresses, and to what else could an Internet domain name possibly
>refer, but an Internet domain?
Obviously an IP address doesn't have to refer to an Internet domain
name, not all IPs are allocated.
You are *REVERSING* what I said, which is that domain names refer to
IP@'s or blocks of same, not that IP@'s refer to domain names (although
this is exactly how RARP works) Why else would ARP & RARP be part
of the Internet protocol suite?
And, I never claimed that anyone can go out and purchase a C-block
today for $35. I don't offer any proof that this is what I pay to continue
my rights, since I don't publicize my personal financial records.
I regulary get inquiries from people wanting to purchase my domain
name, so apparently sombody up there thinks I own the rights to it.
Also, a ping loop on my C-Block indicates no-one is using any of my
IP@'s. Except, of course, me, on my internal LAN, since I use my
ISP's IP@ and a NA(P)T router to masquerade, so as not to publicize
my IP@'s. This is because the backbone routers and DNS servers enforce
the "nonexistent" fact that I possess the rights to them, therefore no one
has been able to "sell" them to anyone else.
Incidentally, the last two ISP's I've used didn't charge me
"extra" for IP@'s, and in fact assigned additional ones without charge
when I had temporary need for them. So, if you shop around, you
should be able to find someone out there who won't soak you.
In fact, one of these was QWEST, so either your information is wrong
or they have changed their policy within the past few months.
!! Apologies to the list: this response was delayed for several hours
because my ISP is having problems.
Sean Reifschneider wrote:
> These messages appear almost like you're trolling. I ordinarily
> avoid them, but I don't want people who don't know any better to
> come away thinking that they can get NSI or register.com to
> allocate them a /24, or that domain names are tied to IP
> It should be an easy argument for you to win. Simply give a URL
> which I can pay $35 for a /24 block of IP addresses. The references
> you gave earlier only allow you to allocate a domain name, and it
> does not make reference to allocation of IP addresses.
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2000 at 11:00:27AM -0600, Duke Smith wrote:
> >registration service through Network Solutions. As I became
> >increasingly dissatisfied with their (absence of) service, I followed
> >a lead posted to this list several months ago and changed my
> >registrar to register.com, with whom I am so far quite satisfied.
> >Consider yourself enlightend, now, regarding "where is it you can
> >get a /24 block for $35 per year". Also, it is true, I did not
> Neither NSI nor register.com allocate IP addresses. PERIOD.
> You cannot go to register.com or networksolutions.com and
> have them allocate you a block of IPs. PERIOD. They will
> register a domain for you. PERIOD.
> If you can show a URL on either of these services where they will
> allocate you an IP, I will publicly appologise to you. Until then,
> I consider you in error. The "http://www.register.com/" web page
> has no reference to IPs or address allocation, only to domain
> >list and compared with numbers from my own experience. Further,
> >it is poor science, argument, or arithmetic to claim to refute a calculation
> >correctly arriving at a number of 576,000%, by saying that you wonder
> I understand how you arrive at the argument. However, since you don't
> actually have any proof to back up your claim that somone can (again,
> today) go out and buy a /24 block of IP addresses for $35, you may
> as well be generating a percentage of over four hundred million percent
> by claiming that you can get a /24 AND a loaf of bread for a nickle.
> It would be equally valid.
> It is poor science to base a calculation on an invalid number, and you
> have yet to prove the $35/year number.
> >As regards this fantasy that there is no relation between domain names
> >and domains, of what else could an IP domain possibly consist, but
> A domain record can consist entirely of CNAME records (pointers to other
> doamin names).
> >IP addresses, and to what else could an Internat domain name possibly
> >refer, but an Internet domain?
> Obviously an IP address doesn't have to refer to an Internet domain
> name, not all IPs are allocated.
> YOU ARE WITNESSING A FRONT THREE-QUARTER VIEW OF TWO ADULTS SHARING A
> TENDER MOMENT. -- Gordon Cole, _Twin_Peaks_
> Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <jafo at tummy.com>
> tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python
> Web Page: http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
More information about the LUG