too many routes

David Mercer dmercer at
Thu Sep 11 21:18:53 UTC 1997

On Thu, 11 Sep 1997, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 1997 at 09:11:55PM -0400, Sean M. Doran wrote:
> > Sanjay Dani <sanjay at> writes:
> > > There are backbone providers and there are providers of specialized
> > > ISP or hosting or security etc. services that need independent* IP
> > > address space and do not have to waste resources on building a private
> > > "backbone".
> Perhaps I misunderstood Sanjay, Sean, but I believe his concern was
> that the addresses _not be the property of an upstream (ie: backbone)
> provider_ to provide flexibility of connection choice.

Thats the position I find myself in, hosting/specialized ISP, who needs a
large enough independent block to be fully routable and multi-homed....
but don't have a /19 or mores worth of hosts yet... Seems the standard
answer for what to do in this situation is "tell the internic (now arin?)
what you have to then, even if its partially lies, to get the block
and AS number".....

> This isn't a network numbering problem, it's a routing  problem.

Precisely, its only a numbering problem in the sense of how that affects
routing/ least in my case...

-David Mercer
infiNETways, Inc.
Tucson, AZ

More information about the NANOG mailing list