Eric, I’d argue that does fall within the definition of incompetence called out by Izaac.
I’m talking about how you run out of RFC-1918 space (if you choose to use it in the first place) without incompetence. Owen > On Feb 11, 2021, at 09:15 , Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > You don't, you wastefully assign a /24 to every unique thing that you think > needs an internal management IP block (even if there's 5 things that answer > pings there), and decide it's too much work to renumber things. Easy for a > big ISP that's also acquired many small/mid-sized ISPs to run out of v4 > private IP space that way. > > > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 4:05 AM Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com > <mailto:o...@delong.com>> wrote: > Please explain to me how you uniquely number 40M endpoints with RFC-1918 > without running out of > addresses and without creating partitioned networks. > > If you can’t, then I’m not the one making excuses. > > Owen > > > > On Feb 9, 2021, at 15:44 , Izaac <iz...@setec.org <mailto:iz...@setec.org>> > > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 02:36:57PM -0800, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> it is definitely possible to run out of RFC-1918 space with scale and no > >> incompetence. > > > > No, it isn't. It's the year 2021. Stop making excuses. > > > > -- > > . ___ ___ . . ___ > > . \ / |\ |\ \ > > . _\_ /__ |-\ |-\ \__ >
