[157247] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Carpenter)
Thu Oct 11 18:43:01 2012
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 18:42:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: Randy Carpenter <rcarpen@network1.net>
To: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
In-Reply-To: <CAP-guGVB6FbxYcZFJ2EzKyue3rZ=by=ttZHodtwQ3yDHOKC1vA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
----- Original Message -----
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Randy Carpenter
> <rcarpen@network1.net> wrote:
> > How many sites do you have? If less than 192, /44 is
> > perfect, unless some of those sites require more than
> > a /48. Then, it gets more complicated :-)
>
> We're having a general math breakdown today. First Jeroen wants to
> fit
> 5 /48's in a /47 and now you want to fit 192 /48's in a /44.
>
> 48-44=4. 2^4=16.
>
> -Bill
Yep... I don't know why, but I was thinking /40.
So,
1 site = /48
2-12 sites = /44
13-192 sites = /40, and so on.
NRPM 6.5.8.2 for details.
/40 bumps you into the next price category, but it is a 1-time expense for endusers.
-Randy
