[140968] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Thu May 26 16:07:24 2011
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <14BA486E-831A-4FFD-A55D-9B5ED50A31B0@matthew.at>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 13:02:20 -0700
To: Matthew Kaufman <matthew@matthew.at>
Cc: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com, NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On May 25, 2011, at 11:12 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
>=20
> On May 26, 2011, at 7:35 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>=20
>>>=20
>>=20
>> Unfortunately, the FCC hasn't really allowed us to since it would be =
very
>> hard to produce useful bandwidth by today's standards within the =
bounds
>> of the spectrum we are allowed to use and the channel separations we
>> are allowed to use.
>>=20
>=20
> You just need to move up in frequency a bit. My slowest ham-band link =
runs at 12 Mbps and my fastest at over 100 Mbps.
>=20
Re: 100Mbps...
Yeah, for a modern household LAN, you're at about 1/3rd my minimum =
bandwidth and 1/10th my current maximum.
For wide area purposes, you're at about 1/100th of the smallest circuits =
we're running in the modern backbone.
> Good reminder that I should renumber the IPv4 portion of that network =
to somewhere in 44.0.0.0/8 however.
>=20
Yeah, not a bad idea. Wonder if we can get a /32 for AMPR from IETF =
since it would be prohibitively expensive to
get it from an RIR.
Owen
