[104618] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Renumbering, was: [NANOG] Multihoming for small frys?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Coulson)
Wed May 21 16:15:28 2008
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 16:15:17 -0400
From: David Coulson <david@davidcoulson.net>
To: deepak@ai.net
In-Reply-To: <48348150.4020504@ai.net>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Deepak Jain wrote:
> Can we all agree that while renumbering sucks, a /24 (or less) is a
> pretty low-pain thing to renumber (vs. say, renumbering a /20 or
> shorter prefix?) In an ideal world, you never have to renumber because
> your allocations were perfect from the get-go.
Depends - If you're an Enterprise where 90% of the equipment is managed
by people who work in the same building, it's not horrible. I renumbered
a bunch of /20s onto a /18 where 75% of the equipment was not in my (or
the company's) control. That sucked big time.
David
