[MLB-WIRELESS] ip allocation list based on suburb

[Drew Whittle]

On Wed, 2002-02-13 at 17:13, darrend at natwide.com.au wrote:


> 
> >You still want to minimise the complexity of your routing.
> 
> Complex routing will be unavoidable, I think we all know that. It's not
> like we're going to be using baby routers with 2MB flash. Even a crappy 486
> running xnix could support tens of thousands of dynamic routing entries.
> 

Complex routing will be required at certain points in the network, but
there is no need to make it more complex than it needs to be. 

Everytime you have to change a route that has to spread thru the net,
with a bad ip allocation policy routes will be changing by the minute or
even second. You don't want that crap spreading all over the net, only
on the segments that need to "know".

Actually, you can do what the hell you want, I'm not living in Melbourne
and what you do will not affect me.


> >Because it is easier for people to remember words than a string of
> >numbers. DNS has _nothing_ to do with routing.
> 
> That was meant to be a retorical question.

That had nothing to do with what was being discussed, other than a way
of saying "I know what I am talking about"

*gets off his soap box and knocks off work for the day*

:D



--
To unsubscribe, send mail to minordomo at wireless.org.au with a subject of 'unsubscribe melbwireless'  
Archive at: http://www.wireless.org.au/cgi-bin/minorweb.pl?A=LIST&L=melbwireless
IRC at: au.austnet.org #melb-wireless