[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: adsl keep alive script
- To: guy keren <choo(at-nospam)actcom.co.il>
- Subject: Re: adsl keep alive script
- From: "Nadav Har'El" <nyh(at-nospam)math.technion.ac.il>
- Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 02:14:35 +0200
- Cc: Ghiora Drori <drori(at-nospam)edrori.com>, linux-il <linux-il(at-nospam)linux.org.il>
- Delivered-To: linux.org.il-linux-il@linux.org.il
- Hebrew-Date: 16 Kislev 5762
- In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSU.4.30_heb2.09.0112010202240.11787-100000@actcom.co.il>; from choo@actcom.co.il on Sat, Dec 01, 2001 at 02:06:32AM +0200
- References: <3C07E9D8.5050807@edrori.com> <Pine.GSU.4.30_heb2.09.0112010202240.11787-100000@actcom.co.il>
- Sender: linux-il-bounce(at-nospam)cs.huji.ac.il
- User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i
On Sat, Dec 01, 2001, guy keren wrote about "Re: adsl keep alive script":
> charging money is one way to limit the number of users who want to get a
> limited resourec. and IP addresses are a limited resource (even if its an
> artificial limit, due to someone once thinking 'well, 32 bits should be
> enough for everybody' ;) ).
This is quite irrelevant, since ADSL users typically leave their ADSL
connection on 100% of the time. Or, if they only turn on their computer
some of the day, they all tend to do it on the same time. The end result
is that an ADSL provider probably (and I didn't check this with actual
statistics) needs almost as many IP numbers as it has customers - even
if these are not fixed IPs.
Users which only log in infrequently probably don't get ADSL - unless they
are rich and don't mind throwing away money.
The only benefit of non-fixed IPs that I can see is lower administration
effort (no need to remember which IP belongs to whom) and easier renumbering,
if the ISP decides to move its ADSL block to a different address block.
> in fact, i'd expect providers to start NATing their ADSL users, if their
> number grows too far and large. otherwise, i don't see how millions of
> ADSL/cable/fixed-line connections could be supported, and i don't see ipv6
> actually coming in any time soon (i.e. withing the next 3-4 years).
Maybe MIT can return some of the 16 million addresses (a class A) it now
controls? Same goes for Apple, and many other organizations. The American
DoD controls much more than that, and I doubt it uses more than 1/1000 of
the addresses it owns...
I don't think we'll be running out of IP space in the next 5 years. Running
out of AS numbers (16 bit only), and a return to exponential growth of
routing tables (after CIDR managed to keep the growth linear for several
years) seem like more immediate problems.
Of course, it doesn't mean we should start giving global IPv4 addresses to
every refrigerator and cellphone on the planet...
--
Nadav Har'El | Saturday, Dec 1 2001, 16 Kislev 5762
nyh@math.technion.ac.il |-----------------------------------------
Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |You have the right to remain silent.
http://nadav.harel.org.il |Anything you say will be used against you.
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to linux-il-request@linux.org.il with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail linux-il-request@linux.org.il