I am having a hard time getting a class C from my current colo ISP. They are telling me that for what I do (gameserver hosting), 10 ips per server is reasonable.

Not only is that completely arbitrary, but wouldnt I have a say in this? Or are they just reluctant to do the itsy bit of work it would take to do this?

I can use them all, I outlined my planned use for them, and ALL of them will be bound at any given time.

In short, is there any REASONABLE reason for their hesitancy?

Well, it is in their best interest that the use of the IPs they allocate are justified. It seems that they don't agree that you need more than 10 IPs per server. I mean, anyone can bind as many IPs as they want, the point is that their use must be justified (ie. making all your web sites IP based, when they could easily be name based).

Out of curiosity, are you planning to use alternate ports for some of the servers? Or are all of your game servers going on the default port? I mean, 10 game servers on a single machine is pushing it anyway. And that's assuming you won't be using any alternate ports. If you are using a single IP for each game server, that could be perceived as a waste.

Just something to think about. I have no idea what your plans are, so I'm not really passing judgement either way.

I can answer some of this.

We are using 1 IP for customer, as having your own port is HIGHLY HIGHLY desired. It separates the could be's from the "doing it well".

The IP usage is not just for gaming.. I have a number of customers who want to colo their own servers, etc..

Besides that, we are working on a top-secret backend app that will dynamically allocate IP's to where they are needed at the time of server order.. and having that demands that we have a pool of IP's that are continuous, 128 minimum.

If they are all in use (pingable), why should they care?

Even ARIN doesnt *prohibit* ip-based hosting, but it is STRONGLY discouraged.

I know ARIN doesn't prohibit it, but it is not uncommon for a provider to reject IP requests based on what they perceive to be a waste.

That seems to be what is happening now. My suggestion is that you stress to your host the importance of default ports to your customers. As a show of good faith, you could consider offering non-default ports for $5 cheaper or something. This might go a long way to convincing them to give you the IPs.

To be honest though, they still may very well reject your request and they wouldn't be entirely wrong to do it.