On 12/4/2011 1:51 PM, David Conrad wrote:
Doug,
On Dec 4, 2011, at 1:13 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
a) use normal space b) use somebody else's space c) redeploy stuff
d) Use 1918 space other than 192.168.[01]/24 for 90% of customers, deal
with one-offs for the rest.
I am making the assumption that the folks who have proposed draft-weil are
sufficiently competent to have ruled out the trivial/obvious solutions.
I admire your optimism. :)
More seriously, the impression I've gathered from various discussions is
that the 90/10 model is viable, but it's not the first choice because
the 10 part involves customer service work that those interested in
deploying CGN would like to avoid in order to protect their margins. I'm
not sympathetic.
And if that doesn't fully answer your "Which part don't you agree with?"
question, I doubt that even a significant portion of ISPs are going to
use routable addresses internally for CGN as the value of those
addresses for their intended purpose is only going to increase, and they
will still need to be able to number publicly facing things after the
RIRs have exhausted their supply.
Doug (not their own, anyway)
--
"We could put the whole Internet into a book."
"Too practical."
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf