nanog mailing list archives
Re: NSP ... New Information
From: Eric Germann <ekgermann () cctec com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 15:48:52 -0400
At 01:36 PM 6/4/97 -0400, you wrote:
Well, that was interesting. Thanks to everyone who has responded thus far. I've gotten a lot of "sale" types of email, but also a lot of really good information. It appears as if I was right in my assumption that I needed to get my own IP block of PI space from the InterNIC.
Isn't the biggest problem with PI space having a big enough network so Sprint and everyone else doesn't filter you? Specifically a /19 or larger (~ 8000 addresses)? Can you justify to them 32 Class C's so you can be seen everywhere? I know of another startup provider who had this problem. Its a chicken and egg scenario. They needed to sell connectivity, but couldn't reach portions of the net, specifically Sprint. Kind of kills your marketing when you can't get to the entire 'Net. How do others deal with this scenario in a startup environment, or even an established environment where you can't justify 8000 addresses yet? Eric
Current thread:
- Re: NSP ... New Information Eric Germann (Jun 04)
- Re: NSP ... New Information Phil Howard (Jun 04)
- Re: NSP ... New Information Miguel A.L. Paraz (Jun 05)
- Re: NSP ... New Information Stephen A Misel (Jun 05)
- Re: NSP ... New Information Michael Dillon (Jun 08)
- Re: NSP ... New Information Tung-Hui Hu (Jun 08)
- Re: NSP ... New Information Bill Manning (Jun 08)
- 192/8 (was Re: NSP ... New Information ) Suzanne Woolf (Jun 08)
- Re: 192/8 (was Re: NSP ... New Information ) Matthew Petach (Jun 08)
- Re: NSP ... New Information George Herbert (Jun 10)
- Re: NSP ... New Information Miguel A.L. Paraz (Jun 05)
- Re: NSP ... New Information Paul A Vixie (Jun 10)
- Re: NSP ... New Information Phil Howard (Jun 04)