Re: IP Management Tool - Minimum Requirements

Would there not be intellectual property difficulties if you wrote a similar system for another company?
Niall
(Interested but also enmeshed in IP problems)
I guess that depends on how similar you mean by similar (-: I don't think IPMT will be anything like Robo-Bijal, code-wise. (Not least because: (1) I will not be the only coder, (2) Manuel's IP libraries are open source, (3) It will probably support IPv6, which Robo-Bijal doesn't, and (4) I would like to do it in OO perl. ) So should hopefully all work out. Guy -- Guy Vegoda \ guy@vegoda.org *Please do not send html* NIC: GUY-RIPE \ guy@cryptography.org.uk *attachments* Unix, Linux Hobbyist \ +44(0)20 7961 8318 (work) www.thenakedfrenchman.com \ +44(0)958 469 532 (cell)

Hiya all, I would like to see some capability for reservation/hierarchy/delegation in such a tool. For example at Viag Interkom we have small ranges loosly reserved to each of 10 or so locations. These loose reservations can be aggregated and only exceptions need to be announced to all routers in our network. From our experience I would say that up to about 30% of an allocation can be reserved with current IPv4 policies, but that could be less depending on the likely assignment types. the reservation can be later shrunk if necessary (not yet needed). Typically a single /24 per site is used for small assignments. If a reservation gets full, another is made - two route announcements are better than no aggregation. Despite this reservation we are able fairly easily to reach the 80% utilisation required from RIPE for further allocations. Hierarchy/reservation is also very important in networks where addresses are in somewhat greater supply (RFC1918 and maybe IPv6). I have moderate perl experience and, after my left upper arm heals from a double fracture last Thursday :) , I may be able to help with some coding. Dave Pratt Viag Interkom
participants (2)
-
Dave Pratt
-
Guy Vegoda