[110729] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Approach to allocating netblocks
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Aidan Whyte)
Wed Jan 14 12:06:39 2009
In-Reply-To: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAKTyXRN5/+lGvU59a+P7CFMBAN6gY+ZG84BMpVQcAbDh1IQAAAATbSgAABAAAAA2J2d7RwxeSbkgvbAlfZLhAQAAAAA=@iname.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:04:40 +0000
From: Aidan Whyte <aidanwhyte@gmail.com>
To: frnkblk@iname.com
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
I guess it might depend on the general profile of your customers'
requirements, but I'd imagine that non-contiguous blocks will be far
more efficient in the long run, with the added benefit of no need for
customers to pursue a renumbering plan every N years which should
nearly always be avoided in any case imho. Obviously, the smaller the
average block size the less efficient it becomes. If the customers are
honest in their expected future ip address requirements it shouldn't
be that often that they'll need more address space in any case.
Aidan
2009/1/14 Frank Bulk <frnkblk@iname.com>:
> Secondary IPs, additional documentation and confusion, and less efficient
> use of address space, are just a few negatives of assigning more netblocks.
>
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aidan Whyte [mailto:aidanwhyte@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 10:35 AM
> To: frnkblk@iname.com
> Subject: Re: Approach to allocating netblocks
>
> Perhaps I'm missing something, but I've never seen much of a problem
> with non-contiguous blocks for customer address space expansion..
