[181672] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ARIN just subdivided their last /17, /18, /19, /20, /21 and /22.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (james machado)
Tue Jun 30 17:29:30 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <op.x0186doxtfhldh@rbeam.xactional.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 14:29:26 -0700
From: james machado <hvgeekwtrvl@gmail.com>
To: Ricky Beam <jfbeam@gmail.com>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Ricky Beam <jfbeam@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2015 10:28:13 -0400, Justin M. Streiner
> <streiner@cluebyfour.org> wrote:
>>
>> There are still isolated pockets of devices out there speaking IPX,
>> DECnet, Appletalk, etc
>
>
> Indeed. I'm one of them. (rarely) ... IPX managed print server. It speaks
> IP, but cannot be managed by IP. I'd throw it away, but it functions as a
> two port serial terminal server as well. (2 parallel, 2 serial)
>
> I don't have any true appletalk (or localtalk!) hardware anymore. But I know
> where there's a palet of them. :-)
>
> I still have MCA token-ring cards for an RS/6000 (and the RS/6000.) I'm just
> waiting for the NCDOT to need one to recoup a wad of tax money.
>
>> or their traffic passes through other devices that encapsulate and
>> de-encapsulate it in IP to allow it to be transported.
>
>
> Ahhhh, the "internet in a box" IPX-IP gateway device. God, how we hated
> those things. But some companies refused to install an IP stack, 'tho they'd
> install the IPX "IP app" suite. (late '90s)
But how much memory you could save if you only ran IPX. Adding the IP
stack would take you below 500K and then you would have programs that
just wouldn't run. QEMM could only do so much.
