[ppml] IPv6>>32

[Tom Vest]

On May 12, 2005, at 12:13 PM, Steve Atkins wrote:

> I also don't think that it's a perceived scarcity of addresses - I
> think Joe User sees that it's because the consumer ISPs don't want
> servers running on consumer accounts because they can charge more for
> accounts that do allow servers. Dynamically assigning addresses to
> always-on connections (and to a lesser extent creative port blocking)
> are primarily for product differentiation, and I think that's pretty
> well understood by Joe User. I've not even heard an ISP claim that
> dynamic assignments are due to scarcity of addresses since the
> days of pay-per-minute dialup.

However, this is the argument that Joe developing country enterprise  
sometimes hears from his locally dominant LIR, who would prefer that  
Joe not multihome. This, in turn, is a significant factor  
contributing to the popular perception(s) that IPv4 is nearing  
exhaustion, and that the current nested arrangements for allocation/ 
assignment control are unfair.

TV
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20050512/4817c90a/attachment.htm>