standards for giving out blocks of IP addresses

Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
Wed Jun 13 00:52:59 UTC 2001


On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 16:32:14 PDT, Josh Richards <jrichard at cubicle.net>  said:
> * Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu <Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu> [20010612 13:03]:
> > Umm.. don't bother.  Let's think this through.  2Mbits/sec of bandwidth
> > will only sustain about 40 56KB modems doing a simultaneous download.

> You've got an interesting view of the $20/mo. retail dial-up market 
> economics.  Very few access providers have end-users on dial-up with such 
> thriving Internet habits (though each access providers' customer base 
> differs).

OK.. I'll admit it - personal viewpoint *may* be a bit slanted, we've been
just a bit ahead of the curve - bev.net launched about a decade ago across
the hall from my office.

http://www.bev.net/project/brochures/about.html

The local people are on-line, big-time, real-time, all the time.  At least
locally, we need to over-provision compared to what a lot of other people
are reporting.

> > Even adding in think time and the like, a /24 should be plenty wide enough.
> 
> I can't contest this since the original poster provided insufficient 
> information.  A single /24 happens to be a default for some providers of T1

Well.. the question was how much space to sell to *another ISP*.  Now, we've
seen several numbers that all seem to agree that several racks of modems will
saturate the 2Mb link to the customer ISP for a /24 or maybe a /23 worth
of dialup modem pool space.

If the new startup ISP is providing colocation, expect that either they
have colocated a lot of idle hardware, or that they'll saturate their 2Mb
even faster.  I'd expect a /24 worth of webservers should saturate an
uplink even faster than a /24 worth of terminal servers.

> You've apparently not paid much attention to how this industry got started
> have you?  Though, they will need the luck...I'll grant you that... :-)

I *was* paying attention - I was there. ;)

Just some days I forget there's people still trying to climb onto the
bandwagon we're desperately trying to get *off*. ;)
-- 
				Valdis Kletnieks
				Operating Systems Analyst
				Virginia Tech


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 211 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20010612/d91d6a1a/attachment.sig>


More information about the NANOG mailing list