nanog mailing list archives
Re: CIDR FAQ
From: bmanning () ISI EDU
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 13:30:37 -0700 (PDT)
Will things get so tough that I will have to ask my customers to renumber because I need to switch from a clutter of small spaces (as built in slow start and and with allocations not larger then /16) into a larger single prefix space? - even when I started out with provider aggregatable space, and tell customers that address space cannot be moved to another provider and I'm warning them that using their old numbers we cannot guarantee "full" connectivety.
Yes
- if large scale renumbering needs to happen, the problem seems to be analog to memory allocation systems (on the fly); I faintly remember that this could mean another factor of ineffeciency for the use of space. How much will this reduce the expected life time of the IPv4 space? (well, of course, under exponential growth it will be not very much)
Already proposed this model for managment of the IPv4 space.
BTW we would need to recognize the need for large scale renumbering a couple of years ahead - else we will not have the tools to do it, not to think about the need to educate network and systems administrators...
Yup. See the latest draft from the IAB and ftp.isi.edu:/pub/bill/renumbering --bill
Current thread:
- Re: CIDR FAQ, (continued)
- Re: CIDR FAQ Tony Li (Aug 15)
- Re: CIDR FAQ Jeremy Porter (Aug 15)
- Re: CIDR FAQ Tony Li (Aug 15)
- Re: CIDR FAQ Jeremy Porter (Aug 15)
- Re: CIDR FAQ Tony Li (Aug 15)
- Re: CIDR FAQ Tony Li (Aug 15)
- Re: CIDR FAQ Yakov Rekhter (Aug 16)
- Re: CIDR FAQ Ruediger Volk (Aug 16)
- Re: CIDR FAQ bmanning (Aug 16)
- Re: CIDR FAQ David J. Schmidt (Aug 16)
- Re: CIDR FAQ Yakov Rekhter (Aug 17)
- Re: CIDR FAQ David J. Schmidt (Aug 17)
- Re: CIDR FAQ Yakov Rekhter (Aug 17)
- Re: CIDR FAQ Jon Zeeff (Aug 17)
- Re: CIDR FAQ Yakov Rekhter (Aug 17)
- Re: CIDR FAQ Dave Siegel (Aug 17)