nanog mailing list archives
Re: routing table size
From: tim.thorne () btinternet com (Tim Thorne)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 19:10:51 GMT
"Mark Radabaugh" <mark () amplex net> wrote:
Obviously you can't keep leaving big 'reserved' holes in your allocations to downstreams for potential growth.
I've seen RIPE allocate /20s under the proviso that the customer use the first /23 now and apply to use the rest of the space as they grow. -- Tim
Current thread:
- Re: routing table size, (continued)
- Re: routing table size David Schwartz (Jul 27)
- Re: routing table size Stephen J. Wilcox (Jul 27)
- Re: routing table size David Schwartz (Jul 27)
- Re: routing table size Stephen J. Wilcox (Jul 27)
- Re: routing table size Brian (Jul 29)
- Re: routing table size Richard A Steenbergen (Jul 29)
- Re: routing table size Paul Schultz (Jul 29)
- RE: routing table size Phil Rosenthal (Jul 29)
- RE: routing table size jnull (Jul 29)
- Re: routing table size David Schwartz (Jul 27)
- RE: routing table size Mark Radabaugh (Jul 29)
- Re: routing table size Tim Thorne (Jul 30)