I worked for an ISP that was bought by another ISP and had to assign all new IP's roughly a /16 worth. Good times. Only one ASN thank goodness
-----Original Message----- From: Deepak Jain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 4:09 PM To: nanog list Subject: Re: Renumbering, was: [NANOG] Multihoming for small frys? Can we all agree that while renumbering sucks, a /24 (or less) is a pretty low-pain thing to renumber (vs. say, renumbering a /20 or shorter prefix?) In an ideal world, you never have to renumber because your allocations were perfect from the get-go. We've all been to the other, more realistic place, no? While we all feel pain for folks who have to do renumbers, even if EVERY single host in there is a MAJOR dns server (which is my personal worst case) for MAJOR sites, even *that* has become much easier to address than it used to be. This is probably rhetorical, but I feel like some threshold of materiality should be roughly described so Operators don't get whipsawed over variable length renumbers longer than a certain length. DJ
