From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Sep 9 13:56:46 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A4E237B407 for ; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 13:56:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f89KuW723568; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 13:56:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Mike Porter" , "ann kok" , Subject: RE: cable modem Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 13:56:31 -0700 Message-ID: <001501c13971$e73e6c00$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <200109091525.f89FP7c08264@c1828785-a.saltlk1.ut.home.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >-----Original Message----- >From: Mike Porter [mailto:mupi@mknet.org] >Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2001 8:25 AM > >I think the business of availabe ip4 addresses is somewhat >exaggerated: just >because all or most of the available addresses have been assigned, doesn't >mean that all of them are actually in use. Especially at any given time, >since for r-dns to work, an ISP must assign an IP to every modem in >its pool. > But of all the modem pools in all the world, how many sit idle at any given >time? > Oh, it's hundreds of times worse than this. If you inspect the IP allocations you will find that companies like Microsoft have been assigned entire class A's. This is insane because they isolate all of those numbers behind firewalls, and probably no more than 100-200 numbers are actually offering services on the Internet and need to be reachable from connections initiated from the Internet. In Microsoft's case they could probably make do with a single /24 allocation if they were to switch everything internally over to RFC1918 addressing. But of course they and companies like them won't unless forced. Yet, Microsoft is the one out there pushing Microsoft Proxy and Microsoft Internet Sharing (NAT) both of which are intended to be used with customers that have renumbered their internal networks over to RFC1918. Another case of do what I say not what I do here. If Microsoft would spend their money on renumbering out of the public ranges they have tied up instead of switching over all the FreeBSD systems on Hotmail over to NT, then the entire Internet would be a whole lot better off. But since their products are crap they are just as undigestible to themselves as they are to customers. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message