From owner-Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Sat Jul 27 00:53:44 1991 Received: by munnari.oz.au (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA02193; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 00:53:46 +1000 (from owner-Big-Internet) Return-Path: Received: from mundamutti.cs.mu.OZ.AU by munnari.oz.au with SMTP (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA02190; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 00:53:44 +1000 (from kre) To: Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Subject: Sometimes I wish all lists were as quiet as this Date: Sat, 27 Jul 91 00:53:41 +0000 Message-Id: <5319.680540021@munnari> From: Robert Elz Other times I don't... There are 89 entries in the list so far, of which 11 are redistribution lists. There have been no (real) messages... Clearly people have been thinking about the problem to some degree, given recent messages on the IETF list, though I must admit to being uncertain whether some of the suggestions there were satire or serious. I'd expect the list to be quiet now until after the IETF - after which, either it will move elsewhere, or I'd hope will start to see some serious discussion, as this clearly is a problem that needs discussion. I'll be away from here (at IETF, then at another meeting) for most of the next 3 weeks - I've asked another of the staff here to look after the -Request address, so additions, deletions, corrections, etc should still be possible. I expect I'll see many of you in Atlanta. kre From owner-Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Sat Jul 27 02:56:47 1991 Received: by munnari.oz.au (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA05188; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 02:57:01 +1000 (from owner-Big-Internet) Return-Path: Received: from ftp.com by munnari.oz.au with SMTP (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA05177; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 02:56:47 +1000 (from stev@ftp.com) Received: from stev.d-cell.ftp.com by ftp.com via PCMAIL with DMSP id AA17151; Fri, 26 Jul 91 13:00:50 -0400 Date: Fri, 26 Jul 91 13:00:50 -0400 Message-Id: <9107261700.AA17151@ftp.com> To: Robert Elz Subject: Re: Sometimes I wish all lists were as quiet as this From: stev@ftp.com (stev knowles) Cc: Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Sender: stev@ftp.com Repository: babyoil.ftp.com Originating-Client: d-cell.ftp.com ya want traffic? the way to fix our problems is to go to a topology based addressing scheme. providing IP addresses to "political" entities without regard for location was a mistake, and the apportionment of addresses (the class A B and C addresses looked good on paper, but in reality, has proved less than optimal. another point, with i plan to bring up at Noel's BOF: i owuld like to suggest we allocate class E addresses to have a subnet mask of 255.255.255.254, for use with serial links. the address space lossage from serial links is immense. From owner-Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Sat Jul 27 03:02:02 1991 Received: by munnari.oz.au (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA05343; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 03:02:10 +1000 (from owner-Big-Internet) Return-Path: Received: from bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk by munnari.oz.au with SMTP (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA05335; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 03:02:02 +1000 (from J.Crowcroft@cs.ucl.ac.uk) Received: from tamdhu.cs.ucl.ac.uk by bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk with SMTP inbound id <28332-0@bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk>; Fri, 26 Jul 1991 18:00:43 +0100 To: Robert Elz Cc: Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Subject: Re: Sometimes I wish all lists were as quiet as this In-Reply-To: Your message of Sat, 27 Jul 91 00:53:41 -0000. <5319.680540021@munnari> Date: Fri, 26 Jul 91 18:00:42 +0100 From: Jon Crowcroft >There have been no (real) messages... THE problem in the Big Internet is the Information Explosion caused by computer mediated communication (of which mail lists are a modest example- you have provided us with a very rare counter example:-) all other problems will fade into technical insignificance:-) to paraphrase Douglas Adams: Cyber Space is big; really big. I personally think that CLNP and good ISIS delpoyment with IP encapsulation for non migrated sites (together with bundled *free* implementations a la BSD TCP) will solve the next order of magnitude routing/addressing problems... use of the X.500 directory to find converters (via contexts in queries) is a must for migration... protocol purism must be thrown out the window, since change is the main constant now... I dont think anyone could predict the growth pattern enough to go beyond that (only the MERIT people, RIPE and a few others have experience of manageing growth on the current scale) plus a certain amount of plain boring politics - some people seem to be suggesting this growth should start to be funded by comercial exploitation - i dont mind part of it going that way, but lets not forget the amount of subsidy that went on in most hi-tech countries for roads/rail/power... jon From owner-Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Sat Jul 27 03:44:52 1991 Received: by munnari.oz.au (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA06327; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 03:44:57 +1000 (from owner-Big-Internet) Return-Path: Received: from MANNIX.BBN.COM by munnari.oz.au with SMTP (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA06322; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 03:44:52 +1000 (from djw@BBN.COM) To: stev knowles Cc: Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Subject: Re: Sometimes I wish all lists were as quiet as this In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 26 Jul 91 13:00:50 -0400. <9107261700.AA17151@ftp.com> Date: Fri, 26 Jul 91 13:37:49 -0400 From: djw@BBN.COM Hi, > another point, with i plan to bring up at Noel's BOF: > i would like to suggest we allocate class E addresses to have a subnet mask > of 255.255.255.254, for use with serial links. the address space lossage > from serial links is immense. I agree with what you want to do, but doesn't such a mask violate some rule about providing a broadcast address (I know that technically they are not real necessary on a point-to-point link)? I thought that you would at least need two bits for the host. So, use 255.255.255.252? -david From owner-Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Sat Jul 27 04:58:50 1991 Received: by munnari.oz.au (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA01597; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 04:58:56 +1000 (from owner-Big-Internet) Return-Path: Received: from ftp.com by munnari.oz.au with SMTP (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA01594; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 04:58:50 +1000 (from stev@ftp.com) Received: from stev.d-cell.ftp.com by ftp.com via PCMAIL with DMSP id AA20725; Fri, 26 Jul 91 15:02:52 -0400 Date: Fri, 26 Jul 91 15:02:52 -0400 Message-Id: <9107261902.AA20725@ftp.com> To: djw@BBN.COM Subject: Re: Sometimes I wish all lists were as quiet as this From: stev@ftp.com (stev knowles) Cc: Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Sender: stev@ftp.com Repository: babyoil.ftp.com Originating-Client: d-cell.ftp.com with the scheme i proposed for point to point links (255.255.255.254), addresses would clump like this: N.N.N.0 and N.N.N.1, N.N.N.2 and N.N.N.3 . . . . even and odd pairs, with the lower number being even, only the LSB changes. From owner-Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Sat Jul 27 06:41:18 1991 Received: by munnari.oz.au (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA03542; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 06:41:33 +1000 (from owner-Big-Internet) Return-Path: Received: from EMERALD.ACC.COM by munnari.oz.au with SMTP (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA03538; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 06:41:18 +1000 (from fbaker@acc.com) Received: by emerald.acc.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09005; Fri, 26 Jul 91 13:38:52 PDT Date: Fri, 26 Jul 91 13:38:52 PDT From: fbaker@acc.com (Fred Baker) Message-Id: <9107262038.AA09005@emerald.acc.com> To: djw@BBN.COM, stev@ftp.com Subject: Class E Addresses Cc: Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au I see what you're getting at, but that's very little different than 129.192.64.129,130/255.255.255.252 Since the latter is already addressed by OSPF and can be subsumed by a LAN's IP Addresses, why impose something that can't be subsumed in a summary link state advertisement? Fred From owner-Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Sat Jul 27 07:27:50 1991 Received: by munnari.oz.au (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA04201; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 07:27:56 +1000 (from owner-Big-Internet) Return-Path: Received: from ALLSPICE.LCS.MIT.EDU by munnari.oz.au with SMTP (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA04198; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 07:27:50 +1000 (from jnc@ALLSPICE.LCS.MIT.EDU) Received: by PTT.LCS.MIT.EDU id AA22815; Fri, 26 Jul 91 17:27:43 EDT Date: Fri, 26 Jul 91 17:27:43 EDT From: jnc@ALLSPICE.LCS.MIT.EDU (Noel Chiappa) Message-Id: <9107262127.AA22815@PTT.LCS.MIT.EDU> To: Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Subject: Internet-Draft Cc: jnc@ALLSPICE.LCS.MIT.EDU Hi, the Internet Draft version of my Routing and Addressing spiel is available, but for some reason I-D announcements are late. It's available in the usual I-D places, name is something like "chiappa-routing-00.txt" or some such gubbish. For those who don't ahve time to plow through the whole thing, chapter 3 is the most important. Noel From owner-Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Sat Jul 27 09:42:41 1991 Received: by munnari.oz.au (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA06669; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 09:42:55 +1000 (from owner-Big-Internet) Return-Path: Received: from muri.cs.mu.OZ.AU by munnari.oz.au with SMTP (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA06666; Sat, 27 Jul 1991 09:42:41 +1000 (from kre) To: jnc@ALLSPICE.LCS.MIT.EDU (Noel Chiappa) Cc: Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Subject: Re: Internet-Draft In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 26 Jul 91 17:27:43 -0400. <9107262127.AA22815@PTT.LCS.MIT.EDU> Date: Sat, 27 Jul 91 09:42:37 +1000 Message-Id: <13043.680571757@munnari> From: Robert Elz Date: Fri, 26 Jul 91 17:27:43 EDT From: jnc@ALLSPICE.LCS.MIT.EDU (Noel Chiappa) Message-ID: <9107262127.AA22815@PTT.LCS.MIT.EDU> name is something like "chiappa-routing-00.txt" If you don't want to hunt for it in the internet-drafts directories, its in the big-internet directory on munanri.oz.au (as well as in munanri's internet-drafts directory) - in compressed form. Even if compressed is no good for you, that will show you the filename to fetch from some other internet-draft repository. kre From owner-Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Tue Jul 30 22:38:19 1991 Received: by munnari.oz.au (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA14169; Tue, 30 Jul 1991 22:38:26 +1000 (from owner-Big-Internet) Return-Path: Received: from ftp.com by munnari.oz.au with SMTP (5.64+1.3.1+0.50) id AA14165; Tue, 30 Jul 1991 22:38:19 +1000 (from stev@ftp.com) Received: from stev.d-cell.ftp.com by ftp.com via PCMAIL with DMSP id AA05810; Tue, 30 Jul 91 08:41:22 -0400 Date: Tue, 30 Jul 91 08:41:22 -0400 Message-Id: <9107301241.AA05810@ftp.com> To: fbaker@acc.com (Fred Baker) Subject: Re: Class E Addresses From: stev@ftp.com (stev knowles) Cc: djw@BBN.COM, stev@ftp.com, Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au Sender: stev@ftp.com Repository: babyoil.ftp.com Originating-Client: d-cell.ftp.com I see what you're getting at, but that's very little different than 129.192.64.129,130/255.255.255.252 Since the latter is already addressed by OSPF and can be subsumed by a LAN's IP Addresses, why impose something that can't be subsumed in a summary link state advertisement? Fred the problem is that this requires variable lenght subnet masks (which few people seem to understand. on the other hand, we can view the addresses as only inter AS information, not being necessary to pass it along outside.