From postman@lists.psi.com Thu Apr 29 00:48:02 1993 Received: from lists.psi.com by fido.wps.com (5.67/1.34) id AA02311; Thu, 29 Apr 93 00:47:54 -0700 Received: by lists.psi.com (4.0/2.1-PSINet Operations ) id AA10033; Thu, 29 Apr 93 03:45:41 EDT Received: from psi.com by lists.psi.com (4.0/2.1-PSINet Operations ) id AA09952; Thu, 29 Apr 93 03:38:08 EDT Received: from diablo.cisco.com by psi.com (4.1/2.1-PSI/PSINet) id AA14389; Thu, 29 Apr 93 03:38:23 EDT Message-Id: <9304290738.AA14389@psi.com> Received: by diablo.cisco.com (1.37.109.4/16.2) id AA07650; Thu, 29 Apr 93 00:37:55 -0700 Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 00:37:55 -0700 From: dave o'leary To: com-priv@psi.com Subject: Another blast from the past.... Status: OR Check this one out... RFC: 814 NAME, ADDRESSES, PORTS, AND ROUTES David D. Clark MIT Laboratory for Computer Science Computer Systems and Communications Group July, 1982 2. The Scope of the Problem "...Currently, the internet is fairly small. It contains no more than 25 active networks, and no more than a few hundred hosts. This makes it possible to install tables which exhaustively list all of these elements. However, any implementation undertaken now should be based on an assumption of a much larger internet. The guidelines currently recommended are an upper limit of about 1,000 networks. If we imagine an average number of 25 hosts per net, this would suggest a maximum number of 25,000 hosts. It is quite unclear whether this host estimate is high or low, but even if it is off by several factors of two, the resulting number is still large enough to suggest that current table management strategies are unacceptable. Some fresh techniques will be required to deal with the internet of the future."