|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: The Big Squeeze
Nathan Stratton wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2 Mar 1997, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> > It's the renumbering part that I think gives people the most
> > heartburn... By the time you get "big enough" to warrent your
> > own block, you've got at least 32 ClassCs of which, I'm betting,
> > at least 28 are "given" to LAN-connected customers. This is
> > a _major_ headache not only for the ISP to go thru but also a
> > major headache to force your customers to go thru. That is, what
> > I think, is what really is most painful; that by the time you
> > are big enough to have your own block, you're too big to want
> > to renumber: Catch 22
>
> Yes, but as a smaller ISP you can offer much better service, and help you
> customers renumber. Yes I of all people know it is a _major_ headache, but
> it can be done, and there are ways to do it.
>
> Just because it is a "_major_ headache", is not a good reason to add a
> route to the global table, or have the nic give you a bigger block then
> you need at that time.
>
Oh I agree... It's just that I know of more than a few ISPs
who have done things like keep their current NSP, but with
something like a 56k line (so they don't have to renumber) and
then get a bigger pipe from somebody else and just use BGP to
make everything work...
--
====================================================================
Jim Jagielski | jaguNET Access Services
[email protected] | http://www.jaguNET.com/
"Not the Craw... the CRAW!"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|