SMURF amplifier block list

Andrew Smith awsmith at
Wed Apr 15 02:18:49 UTC 1998

> As far as .0 and .255 addresses go, I'm no more "asking for trouble" by
> using those than I'm asking for trouble by running an IRC server.  They
> are completely valid addresses.  Perhaps those making such comments are
> better at getting IP space than we are, but we need to squeeze every IP we
> possibly can into use just to provide enough addresses to our customers.

Not to make this note a total flame ... but are you really honestly
trying to say that ARIN won't give you more addresses if you don't
use .0 and .255 addresses on all /23 and larger prefixes?

Out of all the /17-/23 prefixes out there on the net, what percentage
would people say are truely used on a network in "classful supernet"
configurations. Out of that percentage, what percent of those are in
such a dire situation with their past network allocation history that
their future allocations depend on actually allocating and using, in a
production environment, 510 addresses out of a /23 instead of a mere 508? 

  ** Andrew W. Smith ** awsmith at ** Chief Network Engineer **
    ** ** 1-888-NEOSOFT **
       ** "Opportunities multiply as they are seized" - Sun Tzu **

More information about the NANOG mailing list