nanog mailing list archives

Re: Big Temporary Networks


From: Jay Ashworth <jra () baylink com>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 12:24:19 -0400 (EDT)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gaurab Raj Upadhaya" <gaurab () lahai com>

So you're *REALLY* motivated on this "reduce the coverage" thing,
then.

you could say yes :), reduce the coverage per-AP. Most APs I have seen
will start failing with about ~100 associations and not to forget
about the max GE uplink they have. that's about 40-50 people at most
(being optimist).

Really?  100 associations?  On enterprise/carrier grade gear?

Seriously?

g) we have a /32 and /20 (v6 and v4 respectively) address space
assigned by APNIC for this and other events in Asia (including
the APNIC meeting itself) so we use that. We used to have a v4
/16 though before runout.

I'm talking to someone from the Interop team; they have a dedicated
/8.

They gave that 45/8 back and kept 2 x /16 for themselves.

I did not know that.  Good on 'em.

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                  Baylink                       jra () baylink com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates     http://baylink.pitas.com         2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA               #natog                      +1 727 647 1274


Current thread: