nanog mailing list archives
Re: Two renumbering questions
From: johnl () iecc com (John R. Levine)
Date: 5 May 1998 17:34:08 -0000
If it is a singleton hole in a /18, your most net-friendly action would be to voluntarily renumber. The provider's most net-friendly action would be to indicate it was non-portable.
In case I didn't make it clear in my original question, I figured I'd probably have to renumber -- I was more wondering if I had the option to hold on to the old addresses for a little while during the transition, since the overlap I'll get between the old and new upstreams will (for a variety of reasons) probably not be very long. -- John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl () iecc com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail
Current thread:
- Re: Two renumbering questions Alan Hannan (May 01)
- Re: Two renumbering questions Kim Hubbard (May 01)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Two renumbering questions Steve Sobol (May 01)
- Re: Two renumbering questions Steve Sobol (May 01)
- Re: Two renumbering questions Brian Wallingford (May 04)
- Message not available
- Re: Two renumbering questions Jay R. Ashworth (May 05)
- Message not available
- Re: Two renumbering questions John R. Levine (May 05)