[ppml] 2005-1 status
> aren't going to go back in the bottle. You can deconstruct my last
> message all you want as to "needs" or "wants", but when the people who
> sign the contracts and spend the money say they "want" something,
> telling them that they don't "need" it doesn't sound like a good
As a competitive ISP, that would sound like a bad strategy.
As a stewardship organization, the good of the whole trumps the
desire of the one with the checkbook. If we can accomodate both,
then by all means let's do.
Running out of addresses again or building in unscalable structures
sound like they'd be bad for the whole. Some of us disagree on
the likelihood of those propositions, so we debate. Smart people can
come to different beliefs of what the future will bring.