nanog mailing list archives
RE: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report
From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
Date: 22 Sep 2000 19:39:47 -0700
On Fri, 22 September 2000, "Aaron Moreau-Cook" wrote:
up getting only one /24. Then another upstream provider, quite large, forced another /24 upon us. When we stated we didn't need/want it, they said they could take it back but it was not standard practice; all DS3 customers get a /24. Anyway... Think of all the other companies out there who get treated like this?
Yes, it does seem like ARIN doesn't treat everyone the same. I had the same experience. At the same time ARIN is telling me have to to divide my customers up into /27's or ARIN won't give me any more space, a very large upstream provider was making me take a minimum of a /24 for every connection whether I needed it or not. But I couldn't aggregate the /24 into anything.
Current thread:
- RE: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report Roeland M.J. Meyer (Sep 22)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report John Todd (Sep 22)
- Re: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report John Fraizer (Sep 22)
- Re: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report Andrew Brown (Sep 22)
- Re: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report Thomas Marshall Eubanks (Sep 23)
- Re: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report John Fraizer (Sep 22)
- RE: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report Sean Donelan (Sep 22)
- RE: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report Sean Donelan (Sep 22)
- Re: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report nicholas harteau (Sep 22)
- RE: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report jlewis (Sep 22)