Re: How TIGHT is IP Number Allocation?

Matthew S. Crocker (matthew@crocker.com)
Thu, 17 Apr 1997 08:54:50 +0000 (GMT)

On Thu, 17 Apr 1997, Mike Jipping wrote:

We have always routed a 32 IP subnet (30 usable) to our PM2e-30's for use
in the assigned address pool. Works for me. No the PM3 is a pain because
48 modems is not a nice subnet. I'm can route 64 easily but then I have
waste or I could do 32 + 16

-Matt

> "Way Back" when we got our first Portmaster PM2-E30, we were on ComOS
> 3.0.1 and were warned that the IP number allocation scheme used was
> sloppy. We were told that allocation sometimes used up to 5 numbers
> beyond what you'd expect, and that we should allocate 35 numbers for a
> 30 port unit.
>
> Well, now that we use four PM2-E30's those extra 20 numbers for "slop
> space" could be handy used for other purposes.
>
> Question: is the allocation scheme tighter in ComOS 3.3.3 and 3.5? We
> use 3.3.3 and are looking to upgrade to 3.5 soon. Is the allocation
> exact now, or is a little extra number set still recommended?
>
> Thanks.
>
> -- Mike
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Mike Jipping | jipping@macatawa.org
> System Administrator | (616) 395-7509
> Macatawa Area Community Network
>

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew S. Crocker - Systems Administration  	matthew@crocker.com
Crocker Communications				Phone: (413) 587-3350
PO BOX 710					Fax:   (413) 587-3352
Greenfield, MA 01302-0710			http://www.crocker.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------