Been quiet in here...

Clayton Lambert Clay at
Thu Jan 4 12:44:34 EST 2001

I was generalizing, not being vague.  It is an interesting point that
relates to this discussion.  I don't think the comment warrented an overly
deep analysis.  I am not at liberty to disclose the detailed demographics of
our Customers, but the trend is clear (for me, as the maintainer within my
company) that webhosting companies do indeed consume the lions share of IP
address space while operating a relatively small percentage of the physical
devices that we support.


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-vwp at [mailto:owner-vwp at]On Behalf Of Bill
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 7:00 AM
To: 'Clayton Lambert'; vwp at
Subject: RE: Been quiet in here...

Not to be contentious, but "a small percentage of our customer use the
overwhelmingly largeset amount of address space" IS very vague.
I'm all for conservation, I am willing to support policy that enforces
conservation when need exists, but I am unwilling to support policy that is
based upon these anecdotal, rather than factual references.
Bill Darte

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Clayton Lambert [mailto:Clay at]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 4:48 PM
> To: 'Bill Darte'; 'Alec H. Peterson'; vwp at
> Subject: RE: Been quiet in here...
> it is more than a vague notion.  It is a fact...
> A small percentage of our Customers use the overwhelmingly
> largest amounts
> of address space.
> This policy should not scare web-hosters.  I think that
> webhosters should
> make the attempt to be efficient with their use of address
> space.  We have
> hammered our name-based hosting servers and we have not seen
> an appreciable
> drop in performance compared to the same servers running IP
> based hosting.
> If there is a valid reason for a service provider (any
> service, not just
> webhosters) to use IP-based hosting, I think it is not
> unreasonable to have
> them provide documentation to support that requirement.
> Accountability
> isn't something that is necessarily bad.
> -Clayton Lambert
> Exodus Communications
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-vwp at [mailto:owner-vwp at]On Behalf Of Bill
> Darte
> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:24 PM
> To: 'Alec H. Peterson'; vwp at
> Subject: RE: Been quiet in here...
> I have seen no evidence that there is a problem. No scope, no
> magnitude, no
> trends, just a vague notion that it is wasting "lots" of addresses.
> Bill Darte
> AC
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alec H. Peterson [mailto:ahp at]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 2:54 PM
> > To: vwp at
> > Subject: Been quiet in here...
> >
> >
> > Are there any more thoughts on what we should do with the
> > so-called virtual
> > hosting policy?
> >
> > Alec
> >
> > --
> > Alec H. Peterson - ahp at
> > Staff Scientist
> > CenterGate Research Group -
> > "Technology so advanced, even _we_ don't understand it!"
> >

More information about the Vwp mailing list