RE: more specific routes in today reality
- Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 09:06:34 +0200 (MEST)
> > assume that I
> > am cost concious resdient with a sattelite down-link (yupp,
> > they exist),
> > and a DSL line and a Cable link. Should I not be allowed the same easy
> > choice of up-link as the corporate world?
> >
> > Let's then assume that I have my home on VoIP only so NAT is
> > out. Do I get
> > my own AS-number and PA space then?
> >
>
> You are using three different IP addresses that are dynamically (OK. If you
> insist statically) assigned to three different links. But how can I reach
> your web server ?
> This is different from the corporate world to have the same IP coming in
> from different links.
If I only have three addresses I need some form of NAT on my home network,
and that will brak my services as well as block the Web-server, just as
point out. So I need a routable block.
> > > In this situation the most popular solution for local
> > customer, who needs
> > > reliable and cheap IP uplink and high speed access to
> > regional Internet
> > > resources, is to build two channels to local ISPs (not so
> > reliable, but much
> > > more cheaper than even one external uplink) and to local IX.
>
> In this SOHO situation you don't need a seperate entry in the
> global routing table. Also the point is two links (phone line won't
> die the same time as the satellite, will they ?)
No, but in order to use this Sat uplink I need to have globally routable
address block. Which will pollut the routigtable. So in my extream
example, we would end up with a address block per SOHO user.
- kurtis -
|