At 01:05 PM 11/22/04 -0500, Richard Shockey wrote:
Yes Fred I would _expect_ my ISP to sell me a /64 but at what price? It
continues to amaze me that no one discussing the IP V6 adoption issues
will focus attention on the obvious question ..what is it going to cost me?
Is there any way the engineer can predict that or control it?
What the architecture has made exceedingly clear is that the ISP can't
expect to dole out /128 prefixes, and has no incentive to. It could state
that it wants to only do address autoconfiguration on its interfaces, and
it could watch its customers vote with their feet. ISPs aren't that stupid,
I don't think. They understand what Linksys has done with their market.
NAT's have been the inevitable answer to the poor pricing policy of IP
numbering.
Which comes down to a comment on the policy in use in handing out IPv4
addresses. We (collectively) exert very heavy backpressure on ISPs getting
new address allocations, which they pass along to their customers in this
form. Change that policy - and we are - for IPv6 prefixes, and you can plan
on the ISPs following suit.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf