leifj(_at_)it(_dot_)su(_dot_)se (Leif Johansson) wrote on 27.11.04 in
<41A85B71(_dot_)1080304(_at_)it(_dot_)su(_dot_)se>:
Jeroen Massar wrote:
On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 10:11 +0100, Leif Johansson wrote:
For somebody administering a network of 100 machines, the hassle cost of
IP renumbering would be twenty times larger. Given this, how could
anyone wonder why NAT is popular?
Wrong. If you administer 100's or 1000s of machines you build or buy
a system for doing address management. Renumbering is only difficult
if your system is called vi :-)
Wrong ;) Well at least, up to 1000 is probably doable.
But what if you are talking about 100s or 1000s of organizations with
each a 100 or 1000 machines.
My site is 10k+ addresses. Seems easy enough to manage to me :-)
"If you have servers on your segment, they get addresses from the X..Y
pool. Otherwise, you use DHCP, or you get fired."
Something like that? Seems a fairly obvious solution.
MfG Kai
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf