>I know, but that will take a multination company many years to do that.
>Yes, we do not have DHCP.


A multinational company should look at the costs of not having an 
aggressive program of introducing mechanisms that make it easy to 
renumber.  Also, in an Internet economy, any organization that takes 
years to do anything has the future prospects of a brontosaurus.

Consider a scenario such as your ISPs being audited to see that they 
are assigning address space efficiently.  In the process of the 
audit, the address registry learns that you have a registered /16 
that you are not advertising, but want more registered space from 
your providers' allocations.

As address space becomes more tight, I can picture the ISPs being 
told they can't consider your requirements as part of their address 
justification.  Not necessarily a likely scenario today, but not 
beyond the bounds of plausibility.

I apologize if I'm seeming sharp, which might be due either to my 
broken ankle or the drugs I'm taking for it. But I get very, very 
tired of companies that want to play in the public Internet, but find 
it too inconvenient to be good Internet citizens with respect to 
address utilization and impact on global routing. Don't get me wrong; 
some very large networking companies are in this category.  Doesn't 
make me less tired of it.

Don't even begin to get me started on new.net.

>
>JP
>
>--
>
>""Howard C. Berkowitz"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:p05001927b6d5f6ddd97d@[63.216.127.100]...
>>  >I made a mistake in the original email, we own the /16, but there are a
>>  >bounch of /24 which we got from our ISP. We are not globally routing the
>>  >/16, so this makes the story different. We just need to replace those
>/24s
>>  >from the new ISP, probably get something continious. I guess the big
>concern
>>  >is DNS, we will need the change the active time to about 10mins and wait
>>  >till it spreads out before the actual cut-over, so that our down time
>will
>>  >be minimized.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >JP
>>
>>  It would sound like a much more rational approach is to renumber your
>>  internal hosts into private address space, and advertise the /16, not
>>  using ISP space at all.
>>
>>  _________________________________
>>  FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
>>  Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>
>
>_________________________________
>FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: 
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
>Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to