| These were delegated on the return of nets 49 and 50, along w/ about a | /9 of mixed /16 and /24 space. e.g. an overall reduction in the | amount of space. Jon Postel, as the IANA, approved the transfers. | At that time, ARIN did not have control over legacy delegations. So I seem to be missing something that keeps me from understanding this -- why didn't they just turn off the /9 of mixed /16 and /24 space and keep the two pre-existing historical class-As, which would have more fully followed the BCPs? Sean.
| These were delegated on the return of nets 49 and 50, along w/ about a | /9 of mixed /16 and /24 space. e.g. an overall reduction in the | amount of space. Jon Postel, as the IANA, approved the transfers. | At that time, ARIN did not have control over legacy delegations.
So I seem to be missing something that keeps me from understanding this -- why didn't they just turn off the /9 of mixed /16 and /24 space and keep the two pre-existing historical class-As, which would have more fully followed the BCPs?
Sean.
legecy hardware/software. Fully classless kit was just becoming common at the time. (cisco did not support it across the product line) --bill
At 17:12 01/11/2001 +0000, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
So I seem to be missing something that keeps me from understanding this -- why didn't they just turn off the /9 of mixed /16 and /24 space and keep the two pre-existing historical class-As, which would have more fully followed the BCPs?
Sean.
legecy hardware/software. Fully classless kit was just becoming common at the time. (cisco did not support it across the product line)
What, in March 1998 when the exchange was made?? Which product for example? (It may not have been a Cisco default, but as far as I know everything has been classless supporting since at least 1993.) philip --
On Fri, 02 Nov 2001 12:05:14 +1000, Philip Smith said:
What, in March 1998 when the exchange was made?? Which product for example? (It may not have been a Cisco default, but as far as I know everything has been classless supporting since at least 1993.)
It wasn't THAT many years ago that the Interop teams had T-shirts that said "Yes, the subnet mask really IS 255.255.252.0". A co-worker of mine who was involved wit the NOC team kept telling unhappy people "and next year the subnet mask will be 255.255.250.0". Also, remember when DNS came about, and when HOSTS.TXT finally went away. The mere fact that Cisco *sold* a router that did classless right in 1993 doesn't mean there was 100% deployment of same by 1996, or that it then took another year to renumber, and then another year to decide it really WAS time to give the old /8s back.... Change can be quite glacial in some parts of the network. Valdis Kletnieks Operating Systems Analyst Virginia Tech
participants (4)
-
bmanning＠vacation.karoshi.com -
Philip Smith -
smd＠clock.org -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu