nanog mailing list archives
Re: IP address fee??
From: Peter van Dijk <peter () dataloss nl>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 13:51:50 +0200
On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 10:04:08PM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: [snip]
About classfulness: I think it's more relevant, even today, than many people like to admit. Why is it that I can type "network 192.0.2.0" in my Cisco BGP config and the box knows what I'm talking about, but "network 192.0.2.0/24" is no good?
That is because Cisco is quite classful-centric, still. I think defaults for netmasks, based on classes, are very bad. They cause trouble (like the time a certain ISP announced 62/8 to all it's peers on AMS-IX). Cisco should support the /n notation! Greetz, Peter -- peter () dataloss nl | http://www.dataloss.nl/ | Undernet:#clue
Current thread:
- Re: IP address fee??, (continued)
- Re: IP address fee?? Dave Israel (Sep 06)
- RE: IP address fee?? Jeroen Massar (Sep 06)
- Re: IP address fee?? Peter van Dijk (Sep 09)
- Re: IP address fee?? Iljitsch van Beijnum (Sep 06)
- NSA's recommendation for classfull routing (was Re: IP address fee??) Sean Donelan (Sep 06)
- Re: NSA's recommendation for classfull routing (was Re: IP address fee??) Sean Donelan (Sep 06)
- Re: NSA's recommendation for classfull routing (was Re: IP address fee??) Ryan Mooney (Sep 06)
- Re: IP address fee?? Iljitsch van Beijnum (Sep 06)
- Re: IP address fee?? Joe Abley (Sep 06)
- Re: IP address fee?? Iljitsch van Beijnum (Sep 06)
- Re: IP address fee?? Peter van Dijk (Sep 09)
- Re: IP address fee?? Tony Tauber (Sep 05)
- Re: IP address fee?? Etaoin Shrdlu (Sep 05)
- Re: IP address fee?? Christian Malo (Sep 05)
- Re: IP address fee?? Peter van Dijk (Sep 06)
- Re: IP address fee?? Brad Knowles (Sep 06)
- Re: IP address fee?? Peter van Dijk (Sep 06)
- Re: IP address fee?? Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 06)
- classless delegation [was: Re: IP address fee??] Peter van Dijk (Sep 06)
- Re: IP address fee?? Brad Knowles (Sep 06)
- Re: IP address fee?? Peter van Dijk (Sep 06)