[760] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
IETF questions -- Internet growth
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (francis%zaphod@gargoyle.uchicago.e)
Wed May 29 17:13:41 1991
Date: Wed, 29 May 91 16:11:40 CDT
From: francis%zaphod@gargoyle.uchicago.edu
To: emv@ox.com
Cc: solensky@animal.clearpoint.com, ietf@venera.isi.edu, com-priv@uu.psi.com
In-Reply-To: Ed Vielmetti's message of Wed, 29 May 91 02:01 EDT <m0jiJbN-0002AFC@bronte.aa.ox.com>
>(estimates of network number growth, varying from running out in 1994
>to levelling off at 8544 total tops)
>I would say that it's high time to breach the subject of networks
>paying for the use of their numbers. For one thing, it would
>encourage number conservation; people won't get any more than they
>need to if they have to pay for it. The revenues thus generated could
>be used to buy more memory for routing tables in the core gateways.
>(half :-)
Is there any reason, aside from routing table size, to worry too much
about number assignment? Isn't an IP address 4 bytes, giving
4,294,967,296 possible addresses? Until we get to the point of
everybody in the world having his own system, we don't seem to be in
much danger of running out.
/============================================================================\
| Francis Stracke | My opinions are my own. I don't steal them.|
| Department of Mathematics |=============================================|
| University of Chicago | What do you get if you multiply 6 by 9? |
| francis@zaphod.uchicago.edu | --Ultimate Question |
\============================================================================/
