nanog mailing list archives
Re: 20402 routing entries
From: Vince Fuller <vaf () Valinor Stanford EDU>
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 94 9:40:01 PDT
it would have been a reasonable approach had cisco and/or other vendors had a standard release support BGP4 without bugs 12 months ago and had you given 12 months notice C'mon Marty, wake up and smell the kimchi. The writing has been on the wall since RFC 1338 (Supernetting) was published almost two years ago, since shortly after that is when the CIDR addressing plan first started being implemented. cisco and the other router vendors have gone out of their way to support the CIDR effort, having integrated CIDR support into the earliest possible release of their code. CIDR, default, or die - it may not be the law, but it is reality. --Vince - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: 20402 routing entries, (continued)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Martin Lee Schoffstall (Apr 15)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Peter S. Ford (Apr 15)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Martin Lee Schoffstall (Apr 15)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Peter S. Ford (Apr 15)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Martin Lee Schoffstall (Apr 18)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Dennis Ferguson (Apr 15)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Martin Lee Schoffstall (Apr 15)
- 20402 routing entries Tony Li (Apr 15)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Daniel Karrenberg (Apr 16)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Bob Hinden (Apr 17)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Martin Lee Schoffstall (Apr 15)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Jessica Yu (Apr 15)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Martin Lee Schoffstall (Apr 15)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Pushpendra Mohta (Apr 15)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Steven J. Richardson (Apr 15)
- Re: 20402 routing entries Susan Hares (Apr 21)