Tom DeReggi wrote:
I thought a /20 was the minimum allocation.
Also not sure that it would be cost justified for IP blocks smaller
than /19 all things considered.
When it comes to IPs you can't cost justify it since you can't justify a
larger block, but need the protection of not having to renumber.
Therefore, there is no choice other than to start out small or be at the
mercy of your upstream. Cogent for example does funny things with the
IPs they assign, which results in some interesting routes for an ISP
that mutli-homes with Cogent owned IPs.
-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
