Why is classful addressing considered waste?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1












I am trying to understand the addressing strategies. But there is something which I can't grasp. Maybe I am missing a very basic point, if so, I am sorry beforehand.



From my researches, let's say, if a company wants 100,000 IP addresses for their network, Class C won't cut it since Class C can allocate 256 addresses. Same for Class B since it can allocate 65,536 addresses. So they were asking for Class A which can allocate 16,777,216 addresses but that would be a huge waste of IP addresses.



Now coming to my question. Don't all computers in a company reside behind a public IP address configured by a router? Let's say I have one router for an office in Istanbul which has 185.245.32.78 as the public IP address. All the computers in that office would have 192.168.xxx.xxx as private IP addresses. The same for other offices. I could use 20 different public IP addresses for other offices spreading around the world and have same private IP addresses behind a routers.



Doesn't this mean I could have many offices with networks with only Class C allocation?










share|improve this question



























    up vote
    4
    down vote

    favorite
    1












    I am trying to understand the addressing strategies. But there is something which I can't grasp. Maybe I am missing a very basic point, if so, I am sorry beforehand.



    From my researches, let's say, if a company wants 100,000 IP addresses for their network, Class C won't cut it since Class C can allocate 256 addresses. Same for Class B since it can allocate 65,536 addresses. So they were asking for Class A which can allocate 16,777,216 addresses but that would be a huge waste of IP addresses.



    Now coming to my question. Don't all computers in a company reside behind a public IP address configured by a router? Let's say I have one router for an office in Istanbul which has 185.245.32.78 as the public IP address. All the computers in that office would have 192.168.xxx.xxx as private IP addresses. The same for other offices. I could use 20 different public IP addresses for other offices spreading around the world and have same private IP addresses behind a routers.



    Doesn't this mean I could have many offices with networks with only Class C allocation?










    share|improve this question

























      up vote
      4
      down vote

      favorite
      1









      up vote
      4
      down vote

      favorite
      1






      1





      I am trying to understand the addressing strategies. But there is something which I can't grasp. Maybe I am missing a very basic point, if so, I am sorry beforehand.



      From my researches, let's say, if a company wants 100,000 IP addresses for their network, Class C won't cut it since Class C can allocate 256 addresses. Same for Class B since it can allocate 65,536 addresses. So they were asking for Class A which can allocate 16,777,216 addresses but that would be a huge waste of IP addresses.



      Now coming to my question. Don't all computers in a company reside behind a public IP address configured by a router? Let's say I have one router for an office in Istanbul which has 185.245.32.78 as the public IP address. All the computers in that office would have 192.168.xxx.xxx as private IP addresses. The same for other offices. I could use 20 different public IP addresses for other offices spreading around the world and have same private IP addresses behind a routers.



      Doesn't this mean I could have many offices with networks with only Class C allocation?










      share|improve this question















      I am trying to understand the addressing strategies. But there is something which I can't grasp. Maybe I am missing a very basic point, if so, I am sorry beforehand.



      From my researches, let's say, if a company wants 100,000 IP addresses for their network, Class C won't cut it since Class C can allocate 256 addresses. Same for Class B since it can allocate 65,536 addresses. So they were asking for Class A which can allocate 16,777,216 addresses but that would be a huge waste of IP addresses.



      Now coming to my question. Don't all computers in a company reside behind a public IP address configured by a router? Let's say I have one router for an office in Istanbul which has 185.245.32.78 as the public IP address. All the computers in that office would have 192.168.xxx.xxx as private IP addresses. The same for other offices. I could use 20 different public IP addresses for other offices spreading around the world and have same private IP addresses behind a routers.



      Doesn't this mean I could have many offices with networks with only Class C allocation?







      ip ipv4 subnet internet ip-address






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited Sep 16 at 16:40









      Ron Maupin♦

      56.8k953100




      56.8k953100










      asked Sep 15 at 21:49









      HalilM

      234




      234




















          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          6
          down vote



          accepted










          You are confusing the typical home networking setup, which is off-topic here. with a business network. Many businesses have multiple services (often the same type of service provided by different servers), and they need public addressing for each server.



          Under your example, a company with multiple web servers for different functions would have a single public address, and TCP port 80 (HTTP) for that single public address could only be forwarded to one of those servers.




          The original premise of IP is that each host gets a unique address. The version of NAT (NAPT) that allows a network to hide behind a single public address only works with ICMP, TCP, and UDP. Other transport protocols are broken by NAPT, and even some application-layer protocols that use TCP or UDP are broken by NAPT.






          share|improve this answer




















          • Nat can work fine for other protocols too, it depends on the network equipment. I have sctp NAT running.
            – PlasmaHH
            Sep 16 at 20:15










          • @PlasmaHH, the RFC specifies only ICMP, TCP, and UDP, and identifies this as a weakness of NAPT. If the device supports other transport protocols, it is non-standard.
            – Ron Maupin♦
            Sep 16 at 22:25


















          up vote
          5
          down vote













          Network classes died 25 years ago when CIDR was introduced in 1993.



          Classes were extremely wasteful because end user requirements needed to be rounded up to the next largest class. A requirement for 1,000 IP addresses was allocated a class B network, removing 65,536 addresses from the pool. That's a "waste" of 98%.



          You can hide a lot of private IP addresses behind a single public address (or just a few addresses) if you just need client access. However, if you're planning to offer services to the public Internet you do need proper, public IPs.



          Note that NAT was only defined in 1999, six years after CIDR. Without NAT, HTTP and other application-layer proxies need be used to provide private-to-public connectivity. Both NAT and proxies break the end-to-end paradigm of TCP/IP and can cause serious problems.






          share|improve this answer






















          • The general problem is of course exactly as you say. But I certainly remember allocations of multiple class C blocks rather than a class B long before CIDR was universal, though of course this had impact on size of routing tables.
            – jonathanjo
            Sep 16 at 11:33

















          up vote
          5
          down vote













          You bring up several different topics in one question 😏. Let me address them separately.



          First, understand that classful addressing is obsolete and has been since before you were born. I don’t know why they still teach it, but it’s ancient history.



          Second, what you say is theoretically possible, but that’s not the way the Internet works.



          You’re describing Network Address Translation (NAT) which was developed to get around the lack of IPv4 addresses. You use private addresses inside your network and translate them to one or more public addresses. Typically those public addresses belong to your ISP who “rents” them to you. You can get “your own” address space, but only if you’re a large organization - it's also expensive.



          Internet service providers do not advertise networks smaller than /24 on the Internet, so your public addresses for all your offices will be part of your ISP addresses. If you have your own, you can’t advertise anything less than /24 or a block of 256 addresses.






          share|improve this answer






















          • "but only if you’re a large organization" - or if you were in the early days, when they were handing out /8s like Halloween candy to random orgs that had no business owning a /8.
            – Kevin
            Sep 16 at 17:19






          • 1




            @Kevin In the early days, the Internet was just an experimental curiosity, so why not hand out /8s?
            – Ron Trunk
            Sep 16 at 17:51

















          up vote
          2
          down vote














          Don't all computers in a company reside behind a public IP configured by a router?




          This is a set-up which became "normal" in the 1990s - maybe after the end of classful routing in 1993 or at the same time.



          Before that time NAT was at least not common so each computer in the internet had its own public IP address!



          So a company with 260 computers needed 260 public IP addresses.



          With classless routing this actually means 512 public IP addresses; with classful routing this means 65536 public IP addresses.






          share|improve this answer
















          • 2




            Depending on regional addressing policies at a particular time, a 260 requirement might well have had two class C blocks allocated. "Public IP address" was the only kind before RFC 1597 in 1994 (ignoring loopback etc).
            – jonathanjo
            Sep 16 at 11:43


















          up vote
          1
          down vote













          If you're taking some kind of course where they teach you about network classes, you'll probably need to remember that stuff until you've passed. Apart from that: Forget about network classes, it hasn't been relevant for 25 years.



          You're right in saying that simple offices don't need more than one public IP address. But the Internet contains both non-simple offices (the company I work for used to host test servers in our office in Copenhagen that had to be accessible to employees in Dubai) and networks that aren't offices.



          And in the old days there were offices where every device had a public IP address (I managed such a net 16-18 years ago). It had some advantages and some disadvantages.



          Another reason why offices aren't important in this regard: Simple offices often only need the IP address they get from their ISP, meaning they don't even affect the allocation the company might have.






          share|improve this answer





























            up vote
            1
            down vote













            In addition to the points others have mentioned, the classful system allocated the prefixes 0 through 127 as class A nets (and reserved 0 and 127), meaning that half of the address space was allocated to network sizes nobody actually needed, and therefore mostly wasted. Another quarter of the address space was class B nets, which were also bigger than (almost) anyone needed, and therefore also mostly wasted.



            NAT has allowed more organizations (and individuals/families/etc) to fit in class C nets, but only one eighth of the address space was allocated as class C. So even after the NAT (and carrier-grade NAT, etc) became available, the classful system would still be enormously wasteful. In particular, it wouldn't have allowed us to pull back the old class A allocations, and reallocate them as more useful blocks.






            share|improve this answer






















              Your Answer







              StackExchange.ready(function()
              var channelOptions =
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "496"
              ;
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
              createEditor();
              );

              else
              createEditor();

              );

              function createEditor()
              StackExchange.prepareEditor(
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              convertImagesToLinks: false,
              noModals: false,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: null,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              );



              );













               

              draft saved


              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function ()
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f53284%2fwhy-is-classful-addressing-considered-waste%23new-answer', 'question_page');

              );

              Post as a guest






























              6 Answers
              6






              active

              oldest

              votes








              6 Answers
              6






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes








              up vote
              6
              down vote



              accepted










              You are confusing the typical home networking setup, which is off-topic here. with a business network. Many businesses have multiple services (often the same type of service provided by different servers), and they need public addressing for each server.



              Under your example, a company with multiple web servers for different functions would have a single public address, and TCP port 80 (HTTP) for that single public address could only be forwarded to one of those servers.




              The original premise of IP is that each host gets a unique address. The version of NAT (NAPT) that allows a network to hide behind a single public address only works with ICMP, TCP, and UDP. Other transport protocols are broken by NAPT, and even some application-layer protocols that use TCP or UDP are broken by NAPT.






              share|improve this answer




















              • Nat can work fine for other protocols too, it depends on the network equipment. I have sctp NAT running.
                – PlasmaHH
                Sep 16 at 20:15










              • @PlasmaHH, the RFC specifies only ICMP, TCP, and UDP, and identifies this as a weakness of NAPT. If the device supports other transport protocols, it is non-standard.
                – Ron Maupin♦
                Sep 16 at 22:25















              up vote
              6
              down vote



              accepted










              You are confusing the typical home networking setup, which is off-topic here. with a business network. Many businesses have multiple services (often the same type of service provided by different servers), and they need public addressing for each server.



              Under your example, a company with multiple web servers for different functions would have a single public address, and TCP port 80 (HTTP) for that single public address could only be forwarded to one of those servers.




              The original premise of IP is that each host gets a unique address. The version of NAT (NAPT) that allows a network to hide behind a single public address only works with ICMP, TCP, and UDP. Other transport protocols are broken by NAPT, and even some application-layer protocols that use TCP or UDP are broken by NAPT.






              share|improve this answer




















              • Nat can work fine for other protocols too, it depends on the network equipment. I have sctp NAT running.
                – PlasmaHH
                Sep 16 at 20:15










              • @PlasmaHH, the RFC specifies only ICMP, TCP, and UDP, and identifies this as a weakness of NAPT. If the device supports other transport protocols, it is non-standard.
                – Ron Maupin♦
                Sep 16 at 22:25













              up vote
              6
              down vote



              accepted







              up vote
              6
              down vote



              accepted






              You are confusing the typical home networking setup, which is off-topic here. with a business network. Many businesses have multiple services (often the same type of service provided by different servers), and they need public addressing for each server.



              Under your example, a company with multiple web servers for different functions would have a single public address, and TCP port 80 (HTTP) for that single public address could only be forwarded to one of those servers.




              The original premise of IP is that each host gets a unique address. The version of NAT (NAPT) that allows a network to hide behind a single public address only works with ICMP, TCP, and UDP. Other transport protocols are broken by NAPT, and even some application-layer protocols that use TCP or UDP are broken by NAPT.






              share|improve this answer












              You are confusing the typical home networking setup, which is off-topic here. with a business network. Many businesses have multiple services (often the same type of service provided by different servers), and they need public addressing for each server.



              Under your example, a company with multiple web servers for different functions would have a single public address, and TCP port 80 (HTTP) for that single public address could only be forwarded to one of those servers.




              The original premise of IP is that each host gets a unique address. The version of NAT (NAPT) that allows a network to hide behind a single public address only works with ICMP, TCP, and UDP. Other transport protocols are broken by NAPT, and even some application-layer protocols that use TCP or UDP are broken by NAPT.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered Sep 15 at 21:57









              Ron Maupin♦

              56.8k953100




              56.8k953100











              • Nat can work fine for other protocols too, it depends on the network equipment. I have sctp NAT running.
                – PlasmaHH
                Sep 16 at 20:15










              • @PlasmaHH, the RFC specifies only ICMP, TCP, and UDP, and identifies this as a weakness of NAPT. If the device supports other transport protocols, it is non-standard.
                – Ron Maupin♦
                Sep 16 at 22:25

















              • Nat can work fine for other protocols too, it depends on the network equipment. I have sctp NAT running.
                – PlasmaHH
                Sep 16 at 20:15










              • @PlasmaHH, the RFC specifies only ICMP, TCP, and UDP, and identifies this as a weakness of NAPT. If the device supports other transport protocols, it is non-standard.
                – Ron Maupin♦
                Sep 16 at 22:25
















              Nat can work fine for other protocols too, it depends on the network equipment. I have sctp NAT running.
              – PlasmaHH
              Sep 16 at 20:15




              Nat can work fine for other protocols too, it depends on the network equipment. I have sctp NAT running.
              – PlasmaHH
              Sep 16 at 20:15












              @PlasmaHH, the RFC specifies only ICMP, TCP, and UDP, and identifies this as a weakness of NAPT. If the device supports other transport protocols, it is non-standard.
              – Ron Maupin♦
              Sep 16 at 22:25





              @PlasmaHH, the RFC specifies only ICMP, TCP, and UDP, and identifies this as a weakness of NAPT. If the device supports other transport protocols, it is non-standard.
              – Ron Maupin♦
              Sep 16 at 22:25











              up vote
              5
              down vote













              Network classes died 25 years ago when CIDR was introduced in 1993.



              Classes were extremely wasteful because end user requirements needed to be rounded up to the next largest class. A requirement for 1,000 IP addresses was allocated a class B network, removing 65,536 addresses from the pool. That's a "waste" of 98%.



              You can hide a lot of private IP addresses behind a single public address (or just a few addresses) if you just need client access. However, if you're planning to offer services to the public Internet you do need proper, public IPs.



              Note that NAT was only defined in 1999, six years after CIDR. Without NAT, HTTP and other application-layer proxies need be used to provide private-to-public connectivity. Both NAT and proxies break the end-to-end paradigm of TCP/IP and can cause serious problems.






              share|improve this answer






















              • The general problem is of course exactly as you say. But I certainly remember allocations of multiple class C blocks rather than a class B long before CIDR was universal, though of course this had impact on size of routing tables.
                – jonathanjo
                Sep 16 at 11:33














              up vote
              5
              down vote













              Network classes died 25 years ago when CIDR was introduced in 1993.



              Classes were extremely wasteful because end user requirements needed to be rounded up to the next largest class. A requirement for 1,000 IP addresses was allocated a class B network, removing 65,536 addresses from the pool. That's a "waste" of 98%.



              You can hide a lot of private IP addresses behind a single public address (or just a few addresses) if you just need client access. However, if you're planning to offer services to the public Internet you do need proper, public IPs.



              Note that NAT was only defined in 1999, six years after CIDR. Without NAT, HTTP and other application-layer proxies need be used to provide private-to-public connectivity. Both NAT and proxies break the end-to-end paradigm of TCP/IP and can cause serious problems.






              share|improve this answer






















              • The general problem is of course exactly as you say. But I certainly remember allocations of multiple class C blocks rather than a class B long before CIDR was universal, though of course this had impact on size of routing tables.
                – jonathanjo
                Sep 16 at 11:33












              up vote
              5
              down vote










              up vote
              5
              down vote









              Network classes died 25 years ago when CIDR was introduced in 1993.



              Classes were extremely wasteful because end user requirements needed to be rounded up to the next largest class. A requirement for 1,000 IP addresses was allocated a class B network, removing 65,536 addresses from the pool. That's a "waste" of 98%.



              You can hide a lot of private IP addresses behind a single public address (or just a few addresses) if you just need client access. However, if you're planning to offer services to the public Internet you do need proper, public IPs.



              Note that NAT was only defined in 1999, six years after CIDR. Without NAT, HTTP and other application-layer proxies need be used to provide private-to-public connectivity. Both NAT and proxies break the end-to-end paradigm of TCP/IP and can cause serious problems.






              share|improve this answer














              Network classes died 25 years ago when CIDR was introduced in 1993.



              Classes were extremely wasteful because end user requirements needed to be rounded up to the next largest class. A requirement for 1,000 IP addresses was allocated a class B network, removing 65,536 addresses from the pool. That's a "waste" of 98%.



              You can hide a lot of private IP addresses behind a single public address (or just a few addresses) if you just need client access. However, if you're planning to offer services to the public Internet you do need proper, public IPs.



              Note that NAT was only defined in 1999, six years after CIDR. Without NAT, HTTP and other application-layer proxies need be used to provide private-to-public connectivity. Both NAT and proxies break the end-to-end paradigm of TCP/IP and can cause serious problems.







              share|improve this answer














              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer








              edited Sep 16 at 10:27

























              answered Sep 15 at 21:57









              Zac67

              20.4k21047




              20.4k21047











              • The general problem is of course exactly as you say. But I certainly remember allocations of multiple class C blocks rather than a class B long before CIDR was universal, though of course this had impact on size of routing tables.
                – jonathanjo
                Sep 16 at 11:33
















              • The general problem is of course exactly as you say. But I certainly remember allocations of multiple class C blocks rather than a class B long before CIDR was universal, though of course this had impact on size of routing tables.
                – jonathanjo
                Sep 16 at 11:33















              The general problem is of course exactly as you say. But I certainly remember allocations of multiple class C blocks rather than a class B long before CIDR was universal, though of course this had impact on size of routing tables.
              – jonathanjo
              Sep 16 at 11:33




              The general problem is of course exactly as you say. But I certainly remember allocations of multiple class C blocks rather than a class B long before CIDR was universal, though of course this had impact on size of routing tables.
              – jonathanjo
              Sep 16 at 11:33










              up vote
              5
              down vote













              You bring up several different topics in one question 😏. Let me address them separately.



              First, understand that classful addressing is obsolete and has been since before you were born. I don’t know why they still teach it, but it’s ancient history.



              Second, what you say is theoretically possible, but that’s not the way the Internet works.



              You’re describing Network Address Translation (NAT) which was developed to get around the lack of IPv4 addresses. You use private addresses inside your network and translate them to one or more public addresses. Typically those public addresses belong to your ISP who “rents” them to you. You can get “your own” address space, but only if you’re a large organization - it's also expensive.



              Internet service providers do not advertise networks smaller than /24 on the Internet, so your public addresses for all your offices will be part of your ISP addresses. If you have your own, you can’t advertise anything less than /24 or a block of 256 addresses.






              share|improve this answer






















              • "but only if you’re a large organization" - or if you were in the early days, when they were handing out /8s like Halloween candy to random orgs that had no business owning a /8.
                – Kevin
                Sep 16 at 17:19






              • 1




                @Kevin In the early days, the Internet was just an experimental curiosity, so why not hand out /8s?
                – Ron Trunk
                Sep 16 at 17:51














              up vote
              5
              down vote













              You bring up several different topics in one question 😏. Let me address them separately.



              First, understand that classful addressing is obsolete and has been since before you were born. I don’t know why they still teach it, but it’s ancient history.



              Second, what you say is theoretically possible, but that’s not the way the Internet works.



              You’re describing Network Address Translation (NAT) which was developed to get around the lack of IPv4 addresses. You use private addresses inside your network and translate them to one or more public addresses. Typically those public addresses belong to your ISP who “rents” them to you. You can get “your own” address space, but only if you’re a large organization - it's also expensive.



              Internet service providers do not advertise networks smaller than /24 on the Internet, so your public addresses for all your offices will be part of your ISP addresses. If you have your own, you can’t advertise anything less than /24 or a block of 256 addresses.






              share|improve this answer






















              • "but only if you’re a large organization" - or if you were in the early days, when they were handing out /8s like Halloween candy to random orgs that had no business owning a /8.
                – Kevin
                Sep 16 at 17:19






              • 1




                @Kevin In the early days, the Internet was just an experimental curiosity, so why not hand out /8s?
                – Ron Trunk
                Sep 16 at 17:51












              up vote
              5
              down vote










              up vote
              5
              down vote









              You bring up several different topics in one question 😏. Let me address them separately.



              First, understand that classful addressing is obsolete and has been since before you were born. I don’t know why they still teach it, but it’s ancient history.



              Second, what you say is theoretically possible, but that’s not the way the Internet works.



              You’re describing Network Address Translation (NAT) which was developed to get around the lack of IPv4 addresses. You use private addresses inside your network and translate them to one or more public addresses. Typically those public addresses belong to your ISP who “rents” them to you. You can get “your own” address space, but only if you’re a large organization - it's also expensive.



              Internet service providers do not advertise networks smaller than /24 on the Internet, so your public addresses for all your offices will be part of your ISP addresses. If you have your own, you can’t advertise anything less than /24 or a block of 256 addresses.






              share|improve this answer














              You bring up several different topics in one question 😏. Let me address them separately.



              First, understand that classful addressing is obsolete and has been since before you were born. I don’t know why they still teach it, but it’s ancient history.



              Second, what you say is theoretically possible, but that’s not the way the Internet works.



              You’re describing Network Address Translation (NAT) which was developed to get around the lack of IPv4 addresses. You use private addresses inside your network and translate them to one or more public addresses. Typically those public addresses belong to your ISP who “rents” them to you. You can get “your own” address space, but only if you’re a large organization - it's also expensive.



              Internet service providers do not advertise networks smaller than /24 on the Internet, so your public addresses for all your offices will be part of your ISP addresses. If you have your own, you can’t advertise anything less than /24 or a block of 256 addresses.







              share|improve this answer














              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer








              edited Sep 16 at 16:18









              Peter Mortensen

              1395




              1395










              answered Sep 15 at 22:14









              Ron Trunk

              31.7k22668




              31.7k22668











              • "but only if you’re a large organization" - or if you were in the early days, when they were handing out /8s like Halloween candy to random orgs that had no business owning a /8.
                – Kevin
                Sep 16 at 17:19






              • 1




                @Kevin In the early days, the Internet was just an experimental curiosity, so why not hand out /8s?
                – Ron Trunk
                Sep 16 at 17:51
















              • "but only if you’re a large organization" - or if you were in the early days, when they were handing out /8s like Halloween candy to random orgs that had no business owning a /8.
                – Kevin
                Sep 16 at 17:19






              • 1




                @Kevin In the early days, the Internet was just an experimental curiosity, so why not hand out /8s?
                – Ron Trunk
                Sep 16 at 17:51















              "but only if you’re a large organization" - or if you were in the early days, when they were handing out /8s like Halloween candy to random orgs that had no business owning a /8.
              – Kevin
              Sep 16 at 17:19




              "but only if you’re a large organization" - or if you were in the early days, when they were handing out /8s like Halloween candy to random orgs that had no business owning a /8.
              – Kevin
              Sep 16 at 17:19




              1




              1




              @Kevin In the early days, the Internet was just an experimental curiosity, so why not hand out /8s?
              – Ron Trunk
              Sep 16 at 17:51




              @Kevin In the early days, the Internet was just an experimental curiosity, so why not hand out /8s?
              – Ron Trunk
              Sep 16 at 17:51










              up vote
              2
              down vote














              Don't all computers in a company reside behind a public IP configured by a router?




              This is a set-up which became "normal" in the 1990s - maybe after the end of classful routing in 1993 or at the same time.



              Before that time NAT was at least not common so each computer in the internet had its own public IP address!



              So a company with 260 computers needed 260 public IP addresses.



              With classless routing this actually means 512 public IP addresses; with classful routing this means 65536 public IP addresses.






              share|improve this answer
















              • 2




                Depending on regional addressing policies at a particular time, a 260 requirement might well have had two class C blocks allocated. "Public IP address" was the only kind before RFC 1597 in 1994 (ignoring loopback etc).
                – jonathanjo
                Sep 16 at 11:43















              up vote
              2
              down vote














              Don't all computers in a company reside behind a public IP configured by a router?




              This is a set-up which became "normal" in the 1990s - maybe after the end of classful routing in 1993 or at the same time.



              Before that time NAT was at least not common so each computer in the internet had its own public IP address!



              So a company with 260 computers needed 260 public IP addresses.



              With classless routing this actually means 512 public IP addresses; with classful routing this means 65536 public IP addresses.






              share|improve this answer
















              • 2




                Depending on regional addressing policies at a particular time, a 260 requirement might well have had two class C blocks allocated. "Public IP address" was the only kind before RFC 1597 in 1994 (ignoring loopback etc).
                – jonathanjo
                Sep 16 at 11:43













              up vote
              2
              down vote










              up vote
              2
              down vote










              Don't all computers in a company reside behind a public IP configured by a router?




              This is a set-up which became "normal" in the 1990s - maybe after the end of classful routing in 1993 or at the same time.



              Before that time NAT was at least not common so each computer in the internet had its own public IP address!



              So a company with 260 computers needed 260 public IP addresses.



              With classless routing this actually means 512 public IP addresses; with classful routing this means 65536 public IP addresses.






              share|improve this answer













              Don't all computers in a company reside behind a public IP configured by a router?




              This is a set-up which became "normal" in the 1990s - maybe after the end of classful routing in 1993 or at the same time.



              Before that time NAT was at least not common so each computer in the internet had its own public IP address!



              So a company with 260 computers needed 260 public IP addresses.



              With classless routing this actually means 512 public IP addresses; with classful routing this means 65536 public IP addresses.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered Sep 16 at 5:16









              Martin Rosenau

              5055




              5055







              • 2




                Depending on regional addressing policies at a particular time, a 260 requirement might well have had two class C blocks allocated. "Public IP address" was the only kind before RFC 1597 in 1994 (ignoring loopback etc).
                – jonathanjo
                Sep 16 at 11:43













              • 2




                Depending on regional addressing policies at a particular time, a 260 requirement might well have had two class C blocks allocated. "Public IP address" was the only kind before RFC 1597 in 1994 (ignoring loopback etc).
                – jonathanjo
                Sep 16 at 11:43








              2




              2




              Depending on regional addressing policies at a particular time, a 260 requirement might well have had two class C blocks allocated. "Public IP address" was the only kind before RFC 1597 in 1994 (ignoring loopback etc).
              – jonathanjo
              Sep 16 at 11:43





              Depending on regional addressing policies at a particular time, a 260 requirement might well have had two class C blocks allocated. "Public IP address" was the only kind before RFC 1597 in 1994 (ignoring loopback etc).
              – jonathanjo
              Sep 16 at 11:43











              up vote
              1
              down vote













              If you're taking some kind of course where they teach you about network classes, you'll probably need to remember that stuff until you've passed. Apart from that: Forget about network classes, it hasn't been relevant for 25 years.



              You're right in saying that simple offices don't need more than one public IP address. But the Internet contains both non-simple offices (the company I work for used to host test servers in our office in Copenhagen that had to be accessible to employees in Dubai) and networks that aren't offices.



              And in the old days there were offices where every device had a public IP address (I managed such a net 16-18 years ago). It had some advantages and some disadvantages.



              Another reason why offices aren't important in this regard: Simple offices often only need the IP address they get from their ISP, meaning they don't even affect the allocation the company might have.






              share|improve this answer


























                up vote
                1
                down vote













                If you're taking some kind of course where they teach you about network classes, you'll probably need to remember that stuff until you've passed. Apart from that: Forget about network classes, it hasn't been relevant for 25 years.



                You're right in saying that simple offices don't need more than one public IP address. But the Internet contains both non-simple offices (the company I work for used to host test servers in our office in Copenhagen that had to be accessible to employees in Dubai) and networks that aren't offices.



                And in the old days there were offices where every device had a public IP address (I managed such a net 16-18 years ago). It had some advantages and some disadvantages.



                Another reason why offices aren't important in this regard: Simple offices often only need the IP address they get from their ISP, meaning they don't even affect the allocation the company might have.






                share|improve this answer
























                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote









                  If you're taking some kind of course where they teach you about network classes, you'll probably need to remember that stuff until you've passed. Apart from that: Forget about network classes, it hasn't been relevant for 25 years.



                  You're right in saying that simple offices don't need more than one public IP address. But the Internet contains both non-simple offices (the company I work for used to host test servers in our office in Copenhagen that had to be accessible to employees in Dubai) and networks that aren't offices.



                  And in the old days there were offices where every device had a public IP address (I managed such a net 16-18 years ago). It had some advantages and some disadvantages.



                  Another reason why offices aren't important in this regard: Simple offices often only need the IP address they get from their ISP, meaning they don't even affect the allocation the company might have.






                  share|improve this answer














                  If you're taking some kind of course where they teach you about network classes, you'll probably need to remember that stuff until you've passed. Apart from that: Forget about network classes, it hasn't been relevant for 25 years.



                  You're right in saying that simple offices don't need more than one public IP address. But the Internet contains both non-simple offices (the company I work for used to host test servers in our office in Copenhagen that had to be accessible to employees in Dubai) and networks that aren't offices.



                  And in the old days there were offices where every device had a public IP address (I managed such a net 16-18 years ago). It had some advantages and some disadvantages.



                  Another reason why offices aren't important in this regard: Simple offices often only need the IP address they get from their ISP, meaning they don't even affect the allocation the company might have.







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited Sep 16 at 16:18









                  Peter Mortensen

                  1395




                  1395










                  answered Sep 16 at 0:07









                  Henrik

                  1193




                  1193




















                      up vote
                      1
                      down vote













                      In addition to the points others have mentioned, the classful system allocated the prefixes 0 through 127 as class A nets (and reserved 0 and 127), meaning that half of the address space was allocated to network sizes nobody actually needed, and therefore mostly wasted. Another quarter of the address space was class B nets, which were also bigger than (almost) anyone needed, and therefore also mostly wasted.



                      NAT has allowed more organizations (and individuals/families/etc) to fit in class C nets, but only one eighth of the address space was allocated as class C. So even after the NAT (and carrier-grade NAT, etc) became available, the classful system would still be enormously wasteful. In particular, it wouldn't have allowed us to pull back the old class A allocations, and reallocate them as more useful blocks.






                      share|improve this answer


























                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote













                        In addition to the points others have mentioned, the classful system allocated the prefixes 0 through 127 as class A nets (and reserved 0 and 127), meaning that half of the address space was allocated to network sizes nobody actually needed, and therefore mostly wasted. Another quarter of the address space was class B nets, which were also bigger than (almost) anyone needed, and therefore also mostly wasted.



                        NAT has allowed more organizations (and individuals/families/etc) to fit in class C nets, but only one eighth of the address space was allocated as class C. So even after the NAT (and carrier-grade NAT, etc) became available, the classful system would still be enormously wasteful. In particular, it wouldn't have allowed us to pull back the old class A allocations, and reallocate them as more useful blocks.






                        share|improve this answer
























                          up vote
                          1
                          down vote










                          up vote
                          1
                          down vote









                          In addition to the points others have mentioned, the classful system allocated the prefixes 0 through 127 as class A nets (and reserved 0 and 127), meaning that half of the address space was allocated to network sizes nobody actually needed, and therefore mostly wasted. Another quarter of the address space was class B nets, which were also bigger than (almost) anyone needed, and therefore also mostly wasted.



                          NAT has allowed more organizations (and individuals/families/etc) to fit in class C nets, but only one eighth of the address space was allocated as class C. So even after the NAT (and carrier-grade NAT, etc) became available, the classful system would still be enormously wasteful. In particular, it wouldn't have allowed us to pull back the old class A allocations, and reallocate them as more useful blocks.






                          share|improve this answer














                          In addition to the points others have mentioned, the classful system allocated the prefixes 0 through 127 as class A nets (and reserved 0 and 127), meaning that half of the address space was allocated to network sizes nobody actually needed, and therefore mostly wasted. Another quarter of the address space was class B nets, which were also bigger than (almost) anyone needed, and therefore also mostly wasted.



                          NAT has allowed more organizations (and individuals/families/etc) to fit in class C nets, but only one eighth of the address space was allocated as class C. So even after the NAT (and carrier-grade NAT, etc) became available, the classful system would still be enormously wasteful. In particular, it wouldn't have allowed us to pull back the old class A allocations, and reallocate them as more useful blocks.







                          share|improve this answer














                          share|improve this answer



                          share|improve this answer








                          edited Sep 16 at 22:42

























                          answered Sep 16 at 21:21









                          Gordon Davisson

                          1363




                          1363



























                               

                              draft saved


                              draft discarded















































                               


                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function ()
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f53284%2fwhy-is-classful-addressing-considered-waste%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                              );

                              Post as a guest













































































                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Peggy Mitchell

                              Palaiologos

                              The Forum (Inglewood, California)