[310] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: CIDR FAQ
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@ISI.EDU)
Wed Aug 16 16:45:38 1995
From: bmanning@ISI.EDU
To: rv@zeus.NIC.DTAG.DE (Ruediger Volk)
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 13:30:37 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: nanog@merit.edu, cidrd@iepg.org
In-Reply-To: <14672.808600459@zeus.NIC.DTAG.DE> from "Ruediger Volk" at Aug 16, 95 09:14:19 pm
> Will things get so tough that I will have to ask my customers
> to renumber because I need to switch from a clutter of small spaces
> (as built in slow start and and with allocations not larger then /16)
> into a larger single prefix space? - even when I started out with
> provider aggregatable space, and tell customers that address space
> cannot be moved to another provider and I'm warning them that using their
> old numbers we cannot guarantee "full" connectivety.
Yes
>
> - if large scale renumbering needs to happen, the problem seems to be analog
> to memory allocation systems (on the fly); I faintly remember that
> this could mean another factor of ineffeciency for the use of space.
> How much will this reduce the expected life time of the IPv4 space?
> (well, of course, under exponential growth it will be not very much)
Already proposed this model for managment of the IPv4 space.
>
> BTW we would need to recognize the need for large scale renumbering a couple
> of years ahead - else we will not have the tools to do it, not to think
> about the need to educate network and systems administrators...
Yup. See the latest draft from the IAB and
ftp.isi.edu:/pub/bill/renumbering
--bill
