On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Etaoin Shrdlu wrote:
Tony Tauber wrote:
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 01:36:27PM -0400, Derek Samford wrote:
Shane, There is a practice on that (At least here.). Generally we provide a Class C to our customers at no additional charge, but we have
Why in this day and age, 9 years after the invention of CIDR, are we still refering to "class C"'s?
At least as importantly, why do 254 addresses get provided where the actual need might not warrant that quantity?
Because it's easier to do the reverse DNS? Sorry to contribute to the general noise, but that answer's close to the truth.
these days you can easily delegate reverse using CIDR with BIND ... http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2317.html -chris
-- ...some sort of steganographic chaffing and winnowing scheme already exists in practice right here: I frequently find myself having to sort through large numbers of idiotic posts to find the good ones. -- Rufus Faloofus