|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2004 at 12:58:17PM +0100, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: > > On 19-nov-04, at 17:58, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > >Don't have "real connectivity"? I've personally worked with dozens of > >Fortune 500 companies that have internal FR/ATM networks that dwarf > >AT&T, UUnet, etc. in the number of sites connected. Thousands of > >sites is common, and tens of thousands of sites in some cases. Do you > >not consider these networks "real" because each site may only have a > >16k PVC to talk to corporate? > > As far as I can tell, it's pretty rare for an > organization of this size to have their own IP network that they use to > connect all their sites to the global internet, for the simple reason > that leased lines, framerelay or ATM capacity is generally more > expensive than IP connectivity. it is not rare at all, in my experience. my personal dealings with 50+ multinational corporations show that they -ALL- have their own corporate networks that are isolated from the Internet and nearly all run IP over these internal corporate networks. the trival cost of dedicated lines, or FR/ATM cloud, or VPN overlay is much cheaper than a dependance on upstream providers (since no single provider can support their needs) or exposing corporate/trade secrets to the broader internet. > So a single large address block is of little use to such an > organization, unless they get to announce more specifics all over the > place. that does not follow, except from your faulty presumption above. -- bill
|