bicknell at ufp.org
Thu May 12 08:43:08 EDT 2005
In a message written on Thu, May 12, 2005 at 01:19:51AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Verizon gets away with this in IPv4 because there is a perceived
> scarcity of addresses, and, people will let them get away with it
> as a result.
I don't think it's a perceived scarcity of addresses, as I don't
think Joe Average, or even your average small business network admin
has any idea.
The problem is, they have a near-monopoly on a number of services.
Indeed, with their fiber offering it's worse as in some places they
are cutting copper as the fiber is installed, and the fiber is not
subject to UNE's yet. In the end, it's the same reason you pay $8
for a beer, and $5 for a hot dog at a sporting event. Neither beer
nor hot dogs are in short supply, but the owners of the venue have
artificially created scarcity by limiting the food vendors and what
you can bring in. I firmly expect the same behavior from providers
who have basically been trying to enforce lock-in their entire
Recent regulations are not helping matters, making it easier for
iLECs and Cable Providers to insure that no competitive offerings
exist to the home.
I'm still optimistic. I think we'll get a /64 to the home. It's
mainly based around an assumption that people will want autoconfiguration
to work, so a /64 will be required. I think the hopes of a /48 on
"home" service are slim to none though, as the Verizon's of the
world are going to first wonder why you need more than a /64, but
more importantly if they do give it to you it will be for a cost
as an additional revenue stream. Those who need multiple subnets
will find NAT, or subdividing the /64 much cheaper options.
Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ARIN-PPML