nanog mailing list archives
Re: [NANOG] Multihoming for small frys?
From: Joe Warren-Meeks <joe () hole-in-the net>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 15:25:44 +0100
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 12:08:32PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
For multihomed, /22 is still the rule.
Over here in RIPE-land, I just got a /23 for AS44947, announced as two /24's. Seems to work fine. -- joe.
Current thread:
- nanog / nanog-announce subs (was Re: Announce list: Re: Hughes Network), (continued)
- nanog / nanog-announce subs (was Re: Announce list: Re: Hughes Network) Philip Smith (May 23)
- Re: [Nanog-futures] Announce list: Re: Hughes Network Joe Abley (May 23)
- Re: [Nanog-futures] Announce list: Re: Hughes Network Sam Stickland (May 23)
- Re: [Nanog-futures] Announce list: Re: Hughes Network D'Arcy J.M. Cain (May 23)
- Re: [Nanog-futures] Announce list: Re: Hughes Network Marshall Eubanks (May 23)
- RE: [Nanog-futures] Announce list: Re: Hughes Network Jason J. W. Williams (May 23)
- Re: [Nanog-futures] Announce list: Re: Hughes Network Jim Popovitch (May 23)
- Re: [Nanog-futures] Announce list: Re: Hughes Network Robert E. Seastrom (May 23)
- RE: [NANOG] Multihoming for small frys? Security Admin (NetSec) (May 21)
- Re: [NANOG] Multihoming for small frys? Owen DeLong (May 21)
- Re: [NANOG] Multihoming for small frys? Joe Warren-Meeks (May 22)
- Re: [NANOG] Multihoming for small frys? david raistrick (May 21)
- Re: [NANOG] Multihoming for small frys? Seth Mattinen (May 21)
- Re: [NANOG] Multihoming for small frys? Sean Figgins (May 21)