[16208] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: SMURF amplifier block list
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andrew Smith)
Tue Apr 14 22:26:07 1998
From: Andrew Smith <awsmith@rip.ops.neosoft.com>
To: bross@mindspring.net (Brandon Ross)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 21:18:49 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980414174344.14130X-100000@xymox.netops.mindspring.net> from "Brandon Ross" at Apr 14, 98 05:50:02 pm
> As far as .0 and .255 addresses go, I'm no more "asking for trouble" by
> using those than I'm asking for trouble by running an IRC server. They
> are completely valid addresses. Perhaps those making such comments are
> better at getting IP space than we are, but we need to squeeze every IP we
> possibly can into use just to provide enough addresses to our customers.
Not to make this note a total flame ... but are you really honestly
trying to say that ARIN won't give you more addresses if you don't
use .0 and .255 addresses on all /23 and larger prefixes?
Out of all the /17-/23 prefixes out there on the net, what percentage
would people say are truely used on a network in "classful supernet"
configurations. Out of that percentage, what percent of those are in
such a dire situation with their past network allocation history that
their future allocations depend on actually allocating and using, in a
production environment, 510 addresses out of a /23 instead of a mere 508?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Andrew W. Smith ** awsmith@neosoft.com ** Chief Network Engineer **
** http://www.neosoft.com/neosoft/staff/andrew ** 1-888-NEOSOFT **
** "Opportunities multiply as they are seized" - Sun Tzu **
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
