[nsp] /30 over WAN links
limmer at execpc.com
Fri Feb 6 14:38:01 EST 2004
Ah good question. And I think the question actually led me to an answer
to my initial queries.
I suppose if we think long term, where customers might have changes in
needs, it would make sense to number the WAN links with /30s. How messy
would it be, if you began with a /29 or /28 over the WAN, and the
customer's needs calls for more IPs? Worse, what if we started with a
/27, and the customer downsized? What's the next move? Renumber to a
preferred prefix? Sucky. Perhaps routing additional subnets would make
sense, if you started of with a /29, and needed more. But on the
converse, renumbering a /29 to a /30 because the customer has no need
for the extra IPs, isn't the best idea. Especially if DNS and Email
servers are on those IPs.
So, I am concluding that if I number the WAN with the most efficient
subnet (a /30), I now have the option to add or subtract any size subnet
per static routing. Simple, uncomplicated.
Many thanks all for the comments.
Rubens Kuhl Jr. wrote:
> Any scenario that would require or prefer numbered links nowadays ?
Steve Lim - Network Engineer (Michigan)
Corecomm -An ATX Communications Company
Support Bacteria, it's the only culture
everyone has in common. -limmer
More information about the cisco-nsp