Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 21:19:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom Samplonius <tom@sdf.com> To: "Arnold B. Cavazos, Jr." <abcjr@southwind.net> Cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: Using 'private net' IPs for WAN Addresses Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10009242113050.3189-100000@misery.sdf.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.4.21.0009241420130.5679-100000@jasper.southwind.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 24 Sep 2000, Arnold B. Cavazos, Jr. wrote: > > Here is a great description on why one should not use RFC 1918 addresses > for inter-router links: > > http://www.worldgate.com/~marcs/mtu/ Wow... MTU path detection. Most routers use the same MTU on all interfaces, so it isn't a factor. Next, if you assign a /30 for every p2p interface, you can only achieve 50% utilization of the address space (2 used out of 4). That isn't enough to meet the threshold to get more address space. I know a a network provider that is numbering hundreds of p2p links just to free up address space because they don't meet the density requirements. Not to mention that IP based virtual web hosts are now a no-no too... Tom To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.10009242113050.3189-100000>