nanog mailing list archives
Re: PI vs PA Address Space
From: bmanning () ISI EDU
Date: Sat, 20 May 1995 01:02:35 -0700 (PDT)
As an aside, is anyone else besides Sprint behind this /18 model?The user community should not be forced into flash cuts, and the providers can make the needed overlap period of time work for bounded time frames. At a minimum, the model needs to be /18+E (E==entropy due to customer migrations).
Then, if we are going to get into implementation details now, the list should figure out just how long that "needed overlap period" is, since if I remember correctly, PST's original note on this indicated annual reductions in the mask value. Right Paul? -- --bill
Current thread:
- Re: PI vs PA Address Space, (continued)
- Re: PI vs PA Address Space Karl Denninger, MCSNet (May 18)
- Re: PI vs PA Address Space Michael Dillon (May 18)
- Re: PI vs PA Address Space Peter Berger (May 19)
- Re: PI vs PA Address Space Jerry Anderson (May 19)
- Re: PI vs PA Address Space Michael F. Nittmann (May 18)
- Re: PI vs PA Address Space Jerry Anderson (May 18)
- Re: PI vs PA Address Space David R Conrad (May 19)
- PI vs PA Address Space Daniel Karrenberg (May 19)
- Re: PI vs PA Address Space peter (May 19)
- Re: PI vs PA Address Space Michael F. Nittmann (May 19)
- Re: PI vs PA Address Space bmanning (May 20)