[136612] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: And so it ends...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Thu Feb 3 16:58:01 2011
To: George Herbert <george.herbert@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 03 Feb 2011 13:39:25 PST."
<AANLkTikLeHEpMdLHFCS0kqKLqh-JGO=8BK9CXb-EL09b@mail.gmail.com>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2011 16:52:55 -0500
Cc: Jeffrey Lyon <jeffrey.lyon@blacklotus.net>, NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1296769975_6170P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 13:39:25 PST, George Herbert said:
> It's probably most practical for them to renumber into a subset of
> their existing space, collapsing down from the whole /8 into a /10 or
> something longer, which would free up 75% of that space or more.
And they want to go to the trouble of doing that, why, exactly?
Imagine taking that to the CIO and/or budgeting people: "We want to start this
$mumble-million project to renumber". What's the first question they'll ask?
"What's it mean for *our* bottom line?" What's the second? "Then why do we want
to spend this money?"
It just ain't gonna happen till you have good answers to those. "We can spend
$mumble-million renumbering into 1/4 of the space, and then sell off the other
3/4 to various entities for an estimated $mumble-million+20%".
*Then* it will happen.
--==_Exmh_1296769975_6170P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFNSyO3cC3lWbTT17ARAqnUAKDx577B1yVxPEqRbwTJZevD98YlQwCgyjD9
r7Wcal9/3Wca65Jay7DVFt8=
=VUXr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1296769975_6170P--
