Re: How polluted is 1/8?

[John Payne <john () sackheads org>]

On Feb 3, 2010, at 3:10 PM, Joel M Snyder wrote:

> > Having this data is useful, but I can't help to think it would be
> > more useful if it were compared with 27/8, or other networks.  Is
> > this slightly worse, or significantly worse than other networks?
>
> I have only anecdotal information regarding 45/8.
>
> 45/8 is assigned to Interop, and as such it is brought up-and-down as Interop's shows move in and out of convention 
> centers.  Starting at least 5 years ago, it has proved impractical to start announcing 45/8, since this causes 
> immediate and massive amounts of traffic to flow into the show network.
>
> The last time that I know that the full 45/8 was announced, traffic settled down to about a full T3's worth of 
> bandwidth before the network engineers started announcing smaller /16 chunks as actually needed. Even /16 has proved 
> impractical while the network is being built-out, before the show, because the build-out site typically has T1-ish 
> bandwidth---again, saturated with a /16 being announced.

Just because I find it amusing timing... today I sat in a vendor presentation where he connected to his company's demo 
site and I smiled as I saw IP addresses in 45/8 (as well as 10/8 and others).