The Southern Cal site.
Yea, here we go again... and again and again
Justin W. Newton wrote:
> Bah, here we go again.
> At 02:32 PM 2/28/97 -0600, Carol Anne Cypherpunk wrote:
> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >Jim Fleming scambled some electrons to say:
> >Can someone explain what people are supposed to infer from above ?
> >What I got from it was this:
> >Someone with a lotta money, is gonna stomp on somebody
> >who doesn't have a lot of money.
> Don't forget the helicopters, the helicopters are very important.
> >This ain't www3, and as sure as folks are discovering domains,
> >someone (like me but only with tons of bucks) is discovering IP
> >numbers. And they will have the game (legal) played in US courts.
> HINT: WWhile people are trying to make this a business decision, it is not
> strictly so. Behind a lot of the way that IP's are currently allocated are
> /technical/ limitations. Wheteher these limitations are here because Big
> Company X decided to abuse our trust and place false limitations on us, or
> because God stated it to be so, or because we were all too busy looking at
> the pretty blinky lights to build the internet better, the limitations
> remain. There are /possibly/ going to be solutions in 6 months or so, but
> noone has proven that any of these solutions work in LARGE networks.
> (Sorry Karl, you aren't large, and neither is Nathan, and neither am I for
> that matter.) We don't know that these solutions ever /will/ work
> (although they probably will), and it would be unwise of us to setup
> registries /assuming/ that a solution is in the works.
> >Frankly I'd like the 220.127.116.11 ip address (cause I'm an old Beatle fan) :)
> Well, talk to IBM and see if there is a way that they will either sell you
> a connection or allow you to tunnel into their network. Having them sell
> you the address so that your provider could announce it individually would
> be a VeryBadThing(tm).
> >Someday every computer from Apple will have an IP address built in.
> >Just like an operating system.
> >An IP a day keeps the bankruptcy court away.
> Cool, does this mean that Apple is going to become a provider for all of
> their sold computers so that they can announce an aggreaget, or are core
> routers going to have to carry several billion /32's? (Cool, we could use
> the entire available bandwidth of the internet for flap updates).
> >Maybe we even need to add another .xxx to the routing tables, we'd sure
> >have enough IP's for every concievable situation.
> What does it cost to add another .xxx to the IP protocol? I would bet that
> the number would be somewhere betwen $10billion and a trillion, but I could
> be off. Karl, how unfeasible is it for you to renumber your customers
> again? Add into that downtime due to trying to coordinate cutover, and you
> have some interesting economics going on there. This /isn't/ the solution
> (there are solutions being worked on, but this isn't it).
> >Enough rant for now. but it IS what gleaned from that lovely So. Cal site.
> Ok, my turn to rant. What did you do to educate yourself on how the
> internet works before deciding that you had the solution? How many large
> scale networks have you run or talked to the operators of? When did you
> work with, or speak to, people who have allocated, or had allocated to them
> at least a /17 of space about IP allocation issues? How's your education
> level on how routers react in exposure to large numbers of routing table
> entries, especially with frequently changing entries. (If my IP address is
> hard coded into my Mac, I should be able to use it at BOTH of my providers
> right?) Please, please, please folks, don't post until you have spent a
> lot of time researching the effect that IP registries can have on the net.
> The domain issues are NOT the same.
> (For anyone who cares, I was originally against the creation of new TLD's
> because of the headache it would cause my tech support folks when someone
> meant to go to www.foo.web and typed in www.foo.com and wondered why it
> took them to the wrong place. Now, I simply don't care, if people really
> want a billion TLD's, fine by me, it won't break anything. Some of these
> ideas on registries /could/ break things. For more information related to
> competing IP registries, or "buying and selling" IP's, etc etc, please go
> to either the pagan or piara mailing lists.)
> Justin Newton
> Network Architect
> Erol's Internet Services
> ISP/C Director at Large
Janet Pippin * CyberRamp Internet Services
Network Administrator *** 11350 Hillguard Road
jdp at cyberramp.net * Dallas, Texas 75243-8311
http://www.cyberramp.net * (214) 340-2020 (817) 226-2020