[AusNOG] Final /8 allocated to APNIC from IANA (103/8)

[Narelle]

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Mark Andrews <marka at isc.org> wrote:
> In message <C971D0C5.A588%damien at yahoo-inc.com>, Damien Morris writes:
>> Was their v6 strategy back then the same as it is now?
>
> I don't think anyone was thinking about IPv6 in '88.  This is
> pre-CIDR and pre-RIR.  Class B ment "class B" not /16 and you had
> to justify the allocation based on projected usage.  If you went
> over 256 you got a class B.

I can vouch for a fact that we were most certainly not thinking about v6 in '88.

At that time we were just discovering IP, and that new-fangled thing
called subnetting. Most of the unis got a /16 (I'm still trying to get
used to calling it that LOL) and we laid out the networks with as much
forethought as possible. At my uni (UTS) we used /23 networks for the
various faculties, and that plan still seems to be in place today. I
remember the debates about where and what to do: we envisaged a world
where all the offices and equipment were networked, therefore large
subnets and that is really only coming into fruition today.

It wasn't until the mid 90s that the realisation hit that IPv4 was
going to run out, and I participated in the IPng working group at the
time. That was '95. Then came CIDR and NAT...



-- 


Narelle
narellec at gmail.com