IPV4 as a Commodity for Profit

Tue Feb 19 23:51:42 UTC 2008

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 07:56:44 PST, David Conrad said:

> Does InterOp? Does HP need 2 plus a bunch of /16s?  Etc.  In the  
> extreme, does any reasonably sized organization really _need_ more  
> than a few /32s (which could be allocated out of PA space thereby  
> reducing fragmentation) for their NAT gateway and public facing  
> servers?

Only if you think "everybody hiding behind a NAT" is workable - in particular,
if you've got enough hosts that you're using up most of 2 /16s, you probably
have enough machines that might want an *inbound* SYN packet once in a while
that NAT isn't a really good idea.  Maybe if you're a corporation where
98% of the machines really shouldn't be accessing the Internet at all *anyhow*,
but if you're someplace where "Yes, you can get to the Internet" is policy,
you shouldn't be getting into the "but we're not letting you to *all* of
the Internet, just the things NAT works with" food-fight.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20080219/a1e85eca/attachment.sig>