Big Temporary Networks

Sun Sep 16 16:24:19 UTC 2012

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gaurab Raj Upadhaya" <gaurab at lahai.com>

> > So you're *REALLY* motivated on this "reduce the coverage" thing,
> > then.
> 
> you could say yes :), reduce the coverage per-AP. Most APs I have seen
> will start failing with about ~100 associations and not to forget
> about the max GE uplink they have. that's about 40-50 people at most
> (being optimist).

Really?  100 associations?  On enterprise/carrier grade gear?

Seriously?

> >> g) we have a /32 and /20 (v6 and v4 respectively) address space
> >> assigned by APNIC for this and other events in Asia (including
> >> the APNIC meeting itself) so we use that. We used to have a v4
> >> /16 though before runout.
> >
> > I'm talking to someone from the Interop team; they have a dedicated
> > /8.
> 
> They gave that 45/8 back and kept 2 x /16 for themselves.

I did not know that.  Good on 'em.

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                  Baylink                       jra at baylink.com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates     http://baylink.pitas.com         2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA               #natog                      +1 727 647 1274