Mailing List ArchiveSupport open source code!
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: Cisco 2611 2nd thread
- To: tlug@example.com
- Subject: Re: Cisco 2611 2nd thread
- From: Jonathan Q <jq@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:27:22 +0900
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105171934510.25921-100000@example.com>; from sven@example.com on Thu, May 17, 2001 at 07:44:23PM -0500
- References: <20010518015621.D28749@example.com> <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105171934510.25921-100000@example.com>
- Reply-To: tlug@example.com
- Resent-From: tlug@example.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <KQiFXC.A.z_C.brHB7@example.com>
- Resent-Sender: tlug-request@example.com
Sven Simon (sven@example.com) wrote: > So, I'll be using only one ethernet interface and in case he'll > get some more IP once, we'd be able to put them on the other > interface. If his business grows and he can get more IP space (I'm assuming when you said "owns" that he has been given portable IP space) I would strongly recommend that he get a new, larger, continguous block and renumber into it. Renumbering can be a pain, but the reason why is that many large backbone operators filter on prefixes longer than /24 (Abovenet may be the most extreme case; they filter announcements that are shorter than /20), so a person announcing a /24 will not have that route accepted in a good number of places. If his busines goes goes well and he can justify a /23 or /22 down the road, that will be good. Jonathan
- References:
- Re: Cisco 2611 2nd thread
- From: Jonathan Q <jq@example.com>
- Re: Cisco 2611 2nd thread
- From: Sven Simon <sven@example.com>
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Re: Samba on 7.1 not working :(
- Next by Date: Re: Cisco 2611 2nd thread
- Prev by thread: Re: Cisco 2611 2nd thread
- Next by thread: RE: Cisco 2611 2nd thread
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links