🚀 go-pugleaf

Karl Denninger writes:

>>*New IP application.
>>	La Monte will apply for a B level IP space on behalf of 
>>	/usr/group/chicago.
>
>Why is this necessary?  Is there a reason that a "C" class address would not
>do?

My original suggestion was for a class C, but we decided that it would
be horribly inadequate.  The problem is that our IP network will be more
WAN than LAN.  Essentially, we will need to provide a small subnet to each
site.

Currently there are over 100 sites in the .chi.il.us namespace, twice
the number we had only 1 year ago.  Even with modest growth we can
reasonably expect 500 sites in the next 5 years.  Most of these sites
are not yet capable of supporting SLIP, but with the availability of
KA9Q, the Linux TCP/IP project, BSD386, and the promised TCP/IP for
COHERENT, SLIP will become widely available in the next year or two.

Even with 4 bit subnetting we'd need 7 class C addresses for our
current installed base!  I'm sure the NIC would be thrilled to supply
us with 70 class C's :-)

Even with 2 bit subnetting we'd need 2 class C addresses NOW, and we'd
have to hand out multiple subnets to several sites which have more
than 4 machines.

I don't remember if this was in the notes, but the inspiration for
this came from Australia.  A group of UN*X users in Victoria set up
their own IP network which grew up in just 1 year.  It was initially
based on SLIP, but they were eventually able put in their own leased
line backbone.  Once they became an established IP network, it was
very easy for them to connect to the Internet as a separate network.

The schemes which I have heard discussed in the Chicago area to create
a high speed data network have all start with "How do we get Internet
access?".  The lesson from Australia is that if you build your network
first, the Internet will become interested in you.

La Monte H. Yarroll	Preferred:	piggy@gargoyle.uchicago.edu
   Work: piggy@mwc.com	Home:		piggy@baqaqi.chi.il.us
			often:		postmaster@clout.chi.il.us