nanog mailing list archives

Re: The Big Squeeze


From: Jim Jagielski <jim () jaguNET com>
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 15:15:57 -0500 (EST)

Nathan Stratton wrote:

On Sun, 2 Mar 1997, Jim Jagielski wrote:

It's the renumbering part that I think gives people the most
heartburn... By the time you get "big enough" to warrent your
own block, you've got at least 32 ClassCs of which, I'm betting,
at least 28 are "given" to LAN-connected customers. This is
a _major_ headache not only for the ISP to go thru but also a
major headache to force your customers to go thru. That is, what
I think, is what really is most painful; that by the time you
are big enough to have your own block, you're too big to want
to renumber: Catch 22

Yes, but as a smaller ISP you can offer much better service, and help you
customers renumber. Yes I of all people know it is a _major_ headache, but
it can be done, and there are ways to do it. 

Just because it is a "_major_ headache", is not a good reason to add a
route to the global table, or have the nic give you a bigger block then
you need at that time.


Oh I agree... It's just that I know of more than a few ISPs
who have done things like keep their current NSP, but with
something like a 56k line (so they don't have to renumber) and
then get a bigger pipe from somebody else and just use BGP to
make everything work... 

-- 
====================================================================
      Jim Jagielski            |       jaguNET Access Services
     jim () jaguNET com           |       http://www.jaguNET.com/
                  "Not the Craw... the CRAW!"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Current thread: