North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Internic address allocation policy.
On Tue, 19 Nov 1996, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: > Even the private, behind the scenes, allocations > made by the IANA, such as the @Home allocation which was not > made based on SWIP information. How could it be? They did not even > have customers, just a lot of venture capital and the "right" people > on their staff. > > Regardless of whether the skids were greased on this allocation, the > result is the right way to go.. > > As a definite outsider to all this, it looks like much of 24/8 has > been given out in /16../14 sized chunks to various cable operators, > with lots of space in between them (some of them have room to expand > to a /10 or /11...). > > The cable companies *do* have customers; they aren't IP customers > (yet), but they *are* customers, and no doubt the cable providers have > been able to demonstrate how many of their customers already have > computers and access to the internet via modem and are thus realistic > customers for the ip-over-cable system.. I still look forward to a future where every home has an IP address and I thought cable internet access would bring that. However, up here in Canada a new service from the cable companies is soon going to move to a dynamic addressing system. The first reason they told me was that there isn't enough IP space in the world. Is it such a problem for them to purchase more IP space? There is room for expansion in 24, so as far as I can tell if they expect more customers than they have IP space for, they could purchase that space, correct? An article I wrote about the current problems with this new cable-modem service is located at: http://www.magi.com/~bill/linenoiz/LineNoiz-release-3.1.txt -- Billy Biggs [email protected] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -