[759] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: IETF questions -- Internet growth
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (smb@ulysses.att.com)
Wed May 29 17:09:14 1991
From: smb@ulysses.att.com
To: solensky@animal.clearpoint.com (Frank T. Solensky)
Cc: dklein@pueblo.att.com, emv@ox.com, steve@cise.nsf.gov, com-priv@uu.psi.com,
Date: Wed, 29 May 91 17:06:16 EDT
My mail may have come off more critical than intended. I
don't know exactly when AT&T had received the 256 Class B net
numbers, but assume that it predates IP subnetting. If
another similarly-sized organization were to apply today, they
probably would get a Class A net number and assign subnet
numbers much in the same sort of way your internal registry
works.
The problem is that we have many locations, and many networks within
each location. We need subnetting internally for the same reason that
the Internet as a whole needs it -- to keep down the level of routing
traffic. It appeared to us -- and I'd be happy to be corrected if
I'm wrong -- that there's no way (today) to do multiple levels of
subnetting. Too many of the routing protocols and hosts don't
support such a thing.
--Steve Bellovin
