Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt

Greg Skinner <gds@best.com> Mon, 17 July 2000 20:50 UTC

Received: by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) id QAA01728 for ietf-outbound.10@ietf.org; Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:50:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from shell5.ba.best.com (gds@shell5.ba.best.com [206.184.139.136]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA28013 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Jul 2000 16:40:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from gds@localhost) by shell5.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.sh) id NAA15994; Mon, 17 Jul 2000 13:40:02 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 13:40:02 -0700
From: Greg Skinner <gds@best.com>
Message-Id: <200007172040.NAA15994@shell5.ba.best.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Loop: ietf@ietf.org

Masataka:
   
> If IETF makes it clear that AOL is not an ISP, it will commercially
> motivate AOL to be an ISP.

Keith:

> probably not.  folks who subscribe to AOL aren't likely to be
> reading IETF documents.

> face it, it's not the superior quality of AOL's service that keeps
> AOLers from moving - it's their susceptibility to marketing BS and
> their addiction to chat rooms.  it's hard to help those people.

Assuming they need help.  The impression I have gotten from people
who regularly use AOL is that they are generally satisfied with the
nature of the service (as opposed to the quality of the service).
As they discover more about the Internet, they may or may not switch
to "real" ISPs, depending on whether they have needs for what "real"
ISPs provide.

--gregbo