Re: [dhcwg] We can change the world in a 1000 ways (IPv4 over IPv6)

sthaug@nethelp.no Sun, 17 November 2013 16:13 UTC

Return-Path: <sthaug@nethelp.no>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D636811E8E2C for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 08:13:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bAzlCfIDaIaW for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 08:13:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (bizet.nethelp.no [195.1.209.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id BCF9211E8DCA for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 08:13:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 62588 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2013 16:13:32 -0000
Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (HELO localhost) (195.1.209.33) by bizet.nethelp.no with SMTP; 17 Nov 2013 16:13:32 -0000
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 17:13:32 +0100
Message-Id: <20131117.171332.74699187.sthaug@nethelp.no>
To: stenc@s-carlsen.dk
From: sthaug@nethelp.no
In-Reply-To: <5288E1CA.3070104@s-carlsen.dk>
References: <01F5C7CDD919BC53DB9D7A4F661382@thehobsons.co.uk> <CAMm+LwjGOXZft_8eRBg4PdWaC6t6kzTFjYz9Z1ob_VDZo1HAkQ@mail.gmail.com> <5288E1CA.3070104@s-carlsen.dk>
X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] We can change the world in a 1000 ways (IPv4 over IPv6)
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 16:13:54 -0000

> > Neither of the two monopoly providers in my neighborhood supports that
> > service at all except as a 'business' package costing several hundred
> > dollars a month extra.
>
> Pricing can be very different, I get up to 5 fixed IPv4 addresses at
> about 3$/month extra. This means it is only a money machine, actual cost
> is less than the 3$. This makes me wonder if it is a task of the IETF to
> provide a money machine to ISPs?

- It is the RIRs, not IETF, that determine how much ISPs can charge
for IP addresses.

- It sounds like you're saying that those 5 fixed addresses are *not*
worth $36 per year. In that case - have you considered how much you
think they *are* worth, and whether you can vote with your wallet and
switch to a different ISP?

- I have no idea what is the real cost to the ISP of those 5 addresses,
but pretty obviously it's not 0. Presumably the ISP is in the business
to make money. Are you saying that the ISP is making an *unreasonable*
profit charging for fixed IP addresses?

Disclaimer: Working for a service provider that only offers dynamic
addresses to residential customers.

Steinar Haug, AS 2116