IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Int-area] Review of draft-narten-ipv6-3177bis-48boundary-05

Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li> Fri, 20 August 2010 22:46 UTC

Return-Path: <tony.li@tony.li>
X-Original-To: int-area@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38EAB3A67FB for <int-area@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 15:46:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.317
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.317 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.282, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fy+R4mVQt0U4 for <int-area@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 15:46:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from qmta15.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta15.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [76.96.59.228]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 891923A6898 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 15:46:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omta20.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.71]) by qmta15.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id wmHn1e0061YDfWL5FmmgQn; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 22:46:40 +0000
Received: from dhcp-171-70-244-118.cisco.com ([171.70.244.118]) by omta20.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id wmm31e0062ZzSm33gmm9No; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 22:46:35 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
In-Reply-To: <C0AC8FAB6849AB4FADACCC70A949E2F1058062E70A@EUSAACMS0701.eamcs.ericsson.se>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 15:45:59 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D2EC6C44-B0B7-4E20-A7E1-8021E724126F@tony.li>
References: <D74F3837-E115-49FB-A9AB-5E0C53406621@tony.li> <C0AC8FAB6849AB4FADACCC70A949E2F1058062E62F@EUSAACMS0701.eamcs.ericsson.se> <188C11C5-CDBA-4213-83AC-453AE06ADAD5@cisco.com> <4C6EE713.9080805@gmail.com> <4C6EE9D9.2090003@joelhalpern.com> <4C6EEC30.5010409@gmail.com> <C0AC8FAB6849AB4FADACCC70A949E2F1058062E70A@EUSAACMS0701.eamcs.ericsson.se>
To: Eric Gray <eric.gray@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>, "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Review of draft-narten-ipv6-3177bis-48boundary-05
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/int-area>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 22:46:07 -0000

Hi Eric,


> 	The second is that they can differentiate themselves by offering
> address allocation sizes that do not align well with other providers, in
> an attempt to lock-in customers who will find that they can anticipate
> administrative head-aches and extra costs if they ever decide they want 
> to go with a different service provider.  This is probably a bad thing.


Alternate service providers can then respond by matching the odd address space allocation, or providing their next quantum up.  This hurts addressing efficiency slightly, but is unlikely to be a real deterrent.

Regards,
Tony

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email