ISP customer assignments

Tue Oct 13 10:12:22 UTC 2009

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:32:23 -0400
Scott Morris <swm at emanon.com> wrote:

> I'm going to have to pull the "mixed-hat" on this one.  If you are
> comparing this to a true "academia" environment, I'd agree with you. 
> Too much theory, not enough reality in things.  However, I've yet to see
> the part about where the person is being trained from.
> 
> I happen to train people at CCIE level.  I also happen to do consulting,
> implementation, and design work.  In my training environment, there are
> all sorts of re-thinking of what/how things are being taught even within
> the confines of comparison to a lab environment.  But that's a personal
> point of view trying to keep reality involved and be worthwhile.
> 
> I'm not trying to open any sort of debate or can of worms here, but just
> because one is receiving training does not mean the instructor has no
> functional knowledge of something.   I'm interested in hearing the
> playout on this one as well.
> 
> How many addresses do you like on point-to-point circuits?
> 

How ever many the protocol designers thought there should be. 

> Scott
> 
> 
> 
> George Michaelson wrote:
> >
> > On 13/10/2009, at 12:54 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> >
> >> On Oct 12, 2009, at 7:34 PM, Justin Shore <justin at justinshore.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> I'm actually taking an IPv6 class right now and the topic of
> >>> customer assignments came up today (day 1).  The instructor was
> >>> suggesting dynamically allocating /127s to residential customers.  I
> >>> relayed the gist of this thread to him (/48, /56 and /64).  I expect
> >>> to dive deeper into this in the following days in the class.
> >>
> >> Out of curiosity who is conducting this class and what was their
> >> rationale for using /127s?
> >>
> >> Doug
> >
> > As a point of view on this, a member of staff from APNIC was doing a
> > Masters of IT in the last 3-4 years, and had classfull A/B/C
> > addressing taught to her in the networks unit. She found it quite a
> > struggle to convince the lecturer that reality had moved on and they
> > had no idea about CIDR.
> >
> > I have from time to time, asked people in ACM and IEEE about how one
> > informs the tertiary teaching community about this kind of change. The
> > answers were not inspiring: compared to civil engineering, where
> > compliance issues and re-training by professionals is almost regulated
> > (sorry for the R- word) as a function of professional indemnity
> > insurance and status, its much more common for the syllabus to be
> > under continual review.
> >
> > -George
> >
> >
> 