[75724] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
Mon Nov 22 04:18:24 2004
In-Reply-To: <019c01c4cffe$29b7a300$6801a8c0@stephen>
Cc: "North American Noise and Off-topic Gripes" <nanog@merit.edu>
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:15:36 +0100
To: "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On 21-nov-04, at 20:12, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> The point is, that these days applications such as mail and web are
>> sufficiently heavy that you can't even run them cost effectively over
>> dial up (wasting your employee's time costs more than the fatter
>> line) let alone less.
> That assumes the company wants their employees using web or email, or
> that there are even humans at a site to begin with.
No it doesn't, but if this is not the case, then this clause kicks in:
>> if you don't connect to the internet you don't contribute to the
>> global routing table so there is no issue. :-)
>> It would be interested to see some good statistics on this stuff.
>> However many enterprises any of us has seen from the inside, it's
>> still unlikly to be a statistically relevant sample.
> An unfiltered BGP feed should give you stats on what's quoted
> immediately above. If you want numbers of publicly-invisible hosts,
> even if you knew who to ask most would refuse to answer for "security
> reasons" or require an NDA.
No, that's not what I'm interested in. What I'd like to know is how
many big organizations backhaul their internet traffic to one or a few
central sites, and how many connect to one or more ISPs locally at
different sites.
