The MPLS-OPS Archive

[josmon <josmon@rigozsaurus.com>]

On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 12:36:07PM +1000, Julian Breen wrote:

Let me preface with one of my mantras:
      Your net, your rules.  My net, my rules.

[...number pt-to-pts in high 10/8 RFC 1918 space...]
> If the customer has reserved the whole 10-dot range globally, as has
> been the case, we ask them to move to a 172 range.

Why should *they* move?  They pay *you* to do things for *them*...

Or what about the time when a customer is as big, or bigger than 
you?  Case in point:  

  I've recently run into a situation where the customer already has 
  20k+ sites -- all numbered in 10/8 space.  They certainly aren't going 
  to renumber the sites.  


Just because the case is rare, doesn't mean it doesn't play havoc
when you run up against it.  Using registered address space for 
such links means I never have to run into the situation.

[...]
> Don't waste global address space on private links.

I don't think that it is a waste to use a unique addresses to
identify unique links on my network.  I'm strange that way.

I'm glad that your addressing works for the market you serve.
Please recognize that there are legitimate reasons for doing
things in other fashions.

The best part of this whole 'net thing -- we all get to play
by our own rules within our own network.  However, blanket statements 
about policy don't always translate between those diverse networks.

	John

-------
The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml