On Aug 5, 2011, at 8:13 AM, Scott Helms wrote: > >> You say waste, I say perfectly valid use. > > Its waste to carve out of that many subnets without a good reason (and no the > reason presented so far are NOT compelling, IPSEC works perfectly over a > bridged interface). >> >>> If you're dealing with business customers, then your usage versus wasted >>> ratio is much higher and less of a concern, but what's the point? Are you >>> trying to cut down on a large broadcast domain? >>> >> Why is it less of a waste to allocate a /30 to a business using a single >> public >> IP than it is to a residence? This makes no sense to me. >> >> I simply prefer the additional troubleshooting and other capabilities given >> to me in a routed environment in most cases. > If you want that then you need to run a router not have a /30 routed over > your WAN interface. Its far better for your WAN interface to be part of a > much larger subnet that we can in turn route a network to.
I was speaking from the service provider perspective. If I deploy CPE to a customer, I want it to be a router, not a bridge. Owen
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
