FWIW-(which isn't much), IMO people like NAT because
it lets them do what they want without paying more
or getting permission. Cause I think thats really
all they want from any solution.
ISP fees for additional addresses just leveraging an
opportunity to extract a few more dollars. The
opportunity stems out of:
1) a notion of leased addresses, i.e. addresses have
to be returned back when a customer leaves ISP
2) a percieved scarcity of IPv4 addresses.
Overall it goes all the way back to IANA allocation
policy preserving the internet hierarchy.
In theory IPv6 provides enough addresses for everyone.
How to make sure that addresses are not wasted?
Immediate answer - get addresses through your LIR.
Apparently quite a lot of people would want to become
LIR for themselves. At some point we may start
considering e.g. UN sponsored IP address registrars
allocating x-amount of IP addresses to each individual
and establishment on the planet and managing such
allocation.
Peter Sherbin,
peter(_at_)unetadvisors(_dot_)com
--- nick(_dot_)staff(_at_)comcast(_dot_)net wrote:
Anthony G. Atkielski wrote:
AT&T used to charge for any telephone color other
than black, even
though the cost of producing a telephone was the
same no matter what
color it was.
AT&T also used to charge for additional private IP
addresses. I remember one company had a bussiness
package with them and was also leasing a router that
came locked down and configured to use
192.168.0.0/27 on the LAN. When this company wanted
more IP's internally AT&T wanted to charge them more
to "upgrade" them to a 192.168.0.0/24
----------------
John-
I agree that no IPv6 solution involving customers
giving up the (percieved?) freedom of NAT for a
construct that has them suckling from their ISP's
tit again is really going to go over well.
One small note also about the ISP supplied modem -
at least in my experience in Los Angeles - the basic
modems I've seen act solely as a pass-through (they
have no configuration menus -etc). I know today
modem/home networking in a box devices are being
pushed (because the ISP's charge extra for it), but
the basic end user is getting no bells and whistles
-(at least with SBC, Verizon, and Comcast).
FWIW-(which isn't much), IMO people like NAT because
it lets them do what they want without paying more
or getting permission. Cause I think thats really
all they want from any solution.
nick>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf