NANOG/IEPG/ISOC's current role
dalvenja at ict.org
Thu Apr 4 10:17:07 UTC 1996
On Wed, 3 Apr 1996, Paul A Vixie wrote:
> sooner or later we will have to kill off the /24's, which make up 70% of
> the routing table but offer way less than 10% of the total reachable
> destinations. perhaps now that address ownership has been put to bed,
> the gang of big providers can agree on a date after which they will all
> stop listening to or exporting any prefixes longer than /23? THAT would
> be the incentive the industry needs to look at private addressing and
> aggressive renumbering. who's willing to risk collusion lawsuits and
> lost customers? step right up and sign the register please.
I'm not sure if this is the most completely wrong place to ask this
question, so please forgive me if it is, but I'm not sure where else
to ask it...
As someone who's about to renumber a public school district from a /24
to something else, what would be the smallest network to get (from
InterNIC) that would pretty much be guaranteed to be routed for the next
few years? I'm thinking a /22 at the moment, but am not sure.
Granted the best solution would be go to our provider (all the schools
in Santa Clara County, CA go through the county office of education for
internet access) and have them get an /18 or something and distribute
that, but they don't seem to want that. Should I push them for this
Thanks in advance, and apologies for the 'dumb' traffic.
Dalvenjah FoxFire, the Teddy Dragon (also known as Sven Nielsen to some :)
dalvenjah at dal.net --- dalvenjah on IRC
Remember: if you're not on DALnet, you're on the wrong IRC server!!
(/serv irc.dal.net 7000 or telnet telnet.dal.net to try it out)
____ _ _ _ "I had the dagger in my hand, and he has
| _ \ __ _| |_ _____ _ _ (_)__ _| |_the indecency to start dying on his own!"
| |_) / _` | \ V / -_) ' \ | / _` | ' \ --Ambassador G'kar, Babylon 5
|____/\__,_|_|\_/\___|_||_|/ \__,_|_||_| FoxFire -- dalvenjah at dal.net -- (SN90)
More information about the NANOG