IPv4 smaller than /24 leasing?
bob at FiberInternetCenter.com
Tue Mar 13 18:08:09 UTC 2018
Marketplaces - supply and demand and costs to operate as Bill noted (never
thought of that) will settle out the need.
> I am looking at it from an ARIN justification point. If you are a small
> operator and need a /24 you have justification if you give customerâs
> publics, but is it a great line if you are only giving out publics for
> people who need cameras or need to connect in from the outside world. If I
> need a /24 and I donât really use it all am I being shady? It becomes a
> âhow much of a grey area is thereâ kind of thing.
> Justin Wilson
> j2sw at mtin.net
>> On Mar 13, 2018, at 1:37 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:19 PM, Justin Wilson <lists at mtin.net> wrote:
>>> I agree that the global routing table is pretty bloated as is. But
>>> what kind of a solution for providers who need to participate in BGP
>>> but only need a /25?
>> Hi Justin,
>> If you need a /25 and BGP for multihoming or anycasting, get a /24.
>> The cost you impose on the system by using BGP *at all* is much higher
>> than the cost you impose on the system by consuming less than 250
>> "unneeded" Ip addresses.
>> I did a cost analysis on a BGP announcement a decade or so ago. The
>> exact numbers have changed but the bottom line hasn't: it's
>> ridiculously consumptive.
>> Bill Herrin
>> William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
>> Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
More information about the NANOG