Re: Allocations for "always-on" ISPs
- Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 08:47:30 +0100 (MET)
That ofcourse depends on what services you want to offer your
customers.....
I don't see why you want to break services in order to solve assignment
policies? This said, I do realise that there is a assignment policy aspect
to this as well.
- kurtis -
> NAT is your friend - very few home users need real IP addresses.
>
>
> > Hi!
> > With the advent of technologies like ADSL and Ethernet to the home, several new ISP in Europe are starting to offer "always on" Internet access.
> > The allocation strategies vary, if they give a subnet to each household this is usually a /29, if they group more than one household in each subnet the average IPv4 address consumption by each household can be a little less.
> > In any case they need a lot of addresses, i.e. a few millions.
> > Can someone help me to see if what I think it would happen is correct?
> > 1) they request address space to RIPE, with a nicely written documentation that clearly shows that they need millions of addresses
> > 2) nonetheless they won't receive more than a /20 to begin with
> > 3) when they have used more than 80% of this /20, and can prove it, another one will be assigned, most likely not contiguous
> > 4) and so on and so forth, at a very fast pace, until they will have a very fragmented address space
> > Is this correct ?
> > Is it safe to assume that if they start using public address, where really needed, they will always receive new allocations if they can prove they need it until IPv4 addresses last ?
> > Is there any way to reduce the address space fragmentation due to new non contiguous allocations ?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > bruno
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Kurt Erik Lindqvist Kurtis.Lindqvist@localhost
KPNQwest Sweden @ The speed of light http://www.kpnqwest.se
PO Box 23163
S-10435 Stockholm
