20402 routing entries (renumbering)

John Curran jcurran at nic.near.net
Sat Apr 16 01:02:36 UTC 1994

] From: Tim Streater <t.c.streater at dante.org.uk>
] Subject: Re: 20402 routing entries (renumbering)
] Date: Sat, 16 Apr 1994 01:01:38 +0000
] ...
] Now, can you imagine the conversation I might have had if still working
] there and SLAC agrees to exchange its class B (with about 1k out of 64k
] addresses assigned) for some number of class C:
] Me:     SLAC has to renumber!
] Users:  Again? OK Tim - but why? And what's in it for us?
] Me:     (explanation of routing overload deleted)
] Users:  So you are saying that of the 20k or so addresses in routers,
]         SLAC renumbering saves just one entry?
] Me:     Err, yes.
] Users:  Don't ring us, we'll ring you!
] As Marty says, there is (unfortunately) no carrot - and users resent the
] stick.
] ...

   I agree that there is no motivation for renumbering.  I also agreement
that convenient renumbering technology would be very valuable in pursuit 
of CIDR renumbering.  I don't believe that renumbering technology will be
sufficient, because (as Marty notes): there's still no carrot.

   The fact of the matter is that there is going to be a carrot soon... 
it may not be a very big carrot, but there will be one.  At some point 
or another, the cost of route entry propagation will be identified and 
some enterprising soul will turn a "problem" into a business opportunity
by actually recovering these costs seperately.  Yes, it will be messy,
and providers will begin handling routing (not traffic) settlements, 
but if the cost component of routing gets high enough, then it's quite
likely to emerge as a separate item.

   Of course, most folks will be forgiven for entering a single route
into the Internet (and it will be absorbed in service costs as it is
today), but folks with random collections of network numbers will feel
some impact.   Will a fortune 500 company be concerned about the extra
[wild estimate] $250/month to keep their dozen distinct CIDR entries?  
Perhaps not, they may even consider it a good investment compared to 
renumbering when they change providers.  Would the local bookstore 
renumber both their hosts (when changing providers) in order to avoid 
$20/month?  Maybe.  

  Look, if the real cost of a routing entry in the global Internet is 
low, then people will pay it and not worry about CIDR.  If it turns out
that it's quite costly to enter a global route, then some people will 
invest the effort to avoid the cost.  No, it's not going to have an 
impact on most businesses, because the financials will almost work out
to paying for the routing service.  I also expect that SLAC would pay 
to have their entry maintained in the situation above.


More information about the NANOG mailing list