[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RRG] End user network size [ [Q] draft-farinacci-lisp: IPv4 address depletion]
On 9/25/07, Brian E Carpenter <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 2007-09-26 13:41, Robin Whittle wrote:
> > My idea is that there are many end-user networks which need less
> > than 256 IP addresses and whose owners need or strongly desire their
> > networks to be multihomed and/or to be free to move to another ISP
> > without renumbering.
> I feel I have to pick this apart to explain why I disagree.
> I don't think the owners of such small networks care about
> their IP address at all. Their true requirements are
I run a small operation with two upstream connections via the local
monopolies: Verizon Business Fios and Cox Business cable Internet. I
have around 20 addresses in use between the two, attached to 7
servers. The cost is quite modest: around $150 per month to each
provider for which I get about two T1's worth of bandwidth upstream
and 15 or so T1's worth downstream.
My true requirements are for a small number of addresses which reach
me via whichever of those upstreams is at this moment working, closest
and not too clogged. I can't speak for anyone else but I find it
difficult to credit the notion that my requirements are unusual.
William D. Herrin email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org
3005 Crane Dr. Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg