Re: 206.82.160.0/22

[Ehud Gavron <GAVRON () ACES COM>]

Date Sent:  24-SEP-1995 18:03:39 

Noel wrote:
> <Let's see, this argument has now been had on CIDRD, Big-Internet, Com-Priv,
> and now it seems to have struck NANOG. Anyone care to guess how many more
> mailing lists we can have the same debate one? This is really tedious, stupid,
> and wasteful, everyone.>
...
> (although 2^18 is still probably too big). The limit might have to move up 
> if we fill the routing tables with /18's...

Let's say we did have an absolute limit of /18s and 2^18 entries.
2^18 entries of 32 bytes each is 16Mb, which is almost within the
capacity of a Cisco 2500.  (Well, Ok, CISCO would do something clever
about not storing the complete net and mask given that it would never
be more than /18 for external networks.)

Why is this a problem?

Ehud

--
Ehud Gavron     (EG76)
gavron () Hearts ACES COM