What would happen if the customer used private address space and NAT & ALGs to hook this into the two providers' CIDR space? At worst, address space consumption would be doubled (if the customer really needs a full /24 internally), but when we're talking about a couple of /24s versus routing yet another prefix, I think that's preferable. Has anybody noticed that the net global routing table has bumped 40k a couple of times recently? Would the registries have problems with this approach? Another issue is that the I-must-be-multihomed-to-different-providers mantra frequently isn't anything else than a funny idea in somebody's head. -- ------ ___ --- Per G. Bilse, Mgr Network Operations Ctr ----- / / / __ ___ _/_ ---- EUnet Communications Services B.V. ---- /--- / / / / /__/ / ----- Singel 540, 1017 AZ Amsterdam, NL --- /___ /__/ / / /__ / ------ tel: +31 20 5305333, fax: +31 20 6224657 --- ------- 24hr emergency number: +31 20 421 0865 --- Connecting Europe since 1982 --- http://www.EU.net e-mail: bilse@EU.net
What would happen if the customer used private address space and NAT & ALGs to hook this into the two providers' CIDR space? At worst, address space consumption would be doubled (if the customer really needs a full /24 internally),
And at best it's quite likely to be reduced. PIXen et al. work fine on internal networks of 1000s of machines with only one external class C acting as pool address space. And of course the cost of the PIX is probably comparible to the cost of the (larger) router often needed to carry full routing. Alex Bligh Xara Networks
participants (2)
-
Alex.Bligh -
Per Gregers Bilse