The Southern Cal site.

[Janet Pippin]

Yea, here we go again... and again and again
/jdp

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 9.9.9.9 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