IP address fee??

Thu Sep 5 18:39:05 UTC 2002

Tony Tauber wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 01:36:27PM -0400, Derek Samford wrote:
> > > Shane,
> > >             There is a practice on that (At least here.).
> > >             Generally we provide a Class C to our customers at no
> > >             additional charge, but we have
> >
> > Why in this day and age, 9 years after the invention of CIDR, are we
> > still refering to "class C"'s?
> 
> At least as importantly, why do 254 addresses get provided where the
> actual need might not warrant that quantity?

Because it's easier to do the reverse DNS? Sorry to contribute to the
general noise, but that answer's close to the truth.

--
...some sort of steganographic chaffing and winnowing scheme
already exists in practice right here: I frequently find myself
having to sort through large numbers of idiotic posts to find
the good ones.   -- Rufus Faloofus