Get as much IP space as you ever dreamed of, was: Re: Looking to buy IPv4 addresses from class C swamp

John Payne john at sackheads.org
Tue Apr 29 16:18:19 UTC 2003




--On Tuesday, April 29, 2003 10:37 AM +0100 "Stephen J. Wilcox" 
<steve at telecomplete.co.uk> wrote:

> Further to my earlier post.. a large global private network requiring
> unique space at many sites, they use 9/8 .. why not use 10/8 ???
> (renumbering reasons aside that is!)

One reason apart from renumbering, before VPNs were a popular phrase, IBM 
had a large multinational secure private IP network that many IBM customers 
used to connect their various sites, and interconnect to vendors and such. 
Unsurprisingly, IBM also used this network to connect sites together 
(before they built a separate Intranet network) - and so globally 
uniqueness was needed.


> Recall the counter argument from Stephen Sprunk was that it needed a per
> site  allocation from a registry, and yet these guys are managing just
> fine without  it!

There is a per-site allocation from a registry, just an IBM internal one.
There is a vast difference between managing uniqueness within an 
organisation (however large and unwieldly), and managing uniqueness between 
organisations.

(Yes, NAT, ipsec tunnels, ipv6 blah blah blah would be better, but why 
isn't everyone here completely switched over to ipv6?)



More information about the NANOG mailing list