Re: [NTISP] IP delegation...

Gabriel Sponsler ( (no email) )
Fri, 3 Dec 1999 11:39:09 -0800

I am sorry I got your feathers ruffled. Perhaps the inquiry was a bit
The reason that we have the constraint is because of the unusual
circumstance with our upstream provider. They control the class B, and have
allocated us only two class C blocks as of now, so as you surely know 254.0
subnet is appropriate for our circumstance.
I was hoping for a resolution aside from subnetting our customers to
meet their individual IP needs for a couple of reasons. 1) As you can tell
from the above paragraph we are temporarily constrained by the quantity of
IPs we can use. 2) Our sales team have sold odd amounts of IP to our
customers, and once again I am trying to be efficient by not assigning a /28
to someone who only needs 6 IP addresses.
I am somewhat resigned to subnet to each customer accordingly, but then
again that's why I posted to the news group for alternative suggestions.

----- Original Message -----
From: Bob's Lists <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, December 03, 1999 11:19 AM
Subject: RE: [NTISP] IP delegation...

> Pardon my ignorance on this issue, but in starting to sell DSL our company
> has run into a problem delegating IP addresses to customers. Due to the
> configuration constraints of the Cisco router (3810) we are using, we have
> assigned a subnet mask for our end users of thus allowing
> of the users access to all of the addresses in the assigned class C.
> My question is: What would be the best way to avoid customers to just grab
> unused IPs for their workstations? The only way I could do it now is
> assign all the untaken IP to a Nt workstation, but that is cumbersome and
> quite annoying.
> -----------------------
> The only suggestion I can offer, is to get a network admin who knows what
> they're doing.
> First of all, is not a class C, it is 2 class C's (or 1 /23,
> and they're now known). Using that mask, and if, indeed, your upstream has
> allocated you a class C, I'm surprised they haven't nailed you yet for
> 'unusual traffic' on your link...
> Next, you should be allocating customers only what they need. If they need
> address, give them a /30 (with the gateway on your router, leaving 1 IP at
> the customer end. Similarly for customers requiring more addresses, assign
> them appropriately sized subnets.
> What configuration restraints?
> Whoever set it up being incapable is the only restraint I see here.
> Regards
> Bob
> For more information about this list (including removal) go to:

For more information about this list (including removal) go to: