IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Market forces

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Mon, 09 November 2020 20:21 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C69903A134B for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 12:21:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.887
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_DNS_FOR_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NcMDL11JP7Zo for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 12:21:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x833.google.com (mail-qt1-x833.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::833]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4359C3A1348 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 12:21:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x833.google.com with SMTP id m65so6952654qte.11 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 12:21:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=4NvQc7ldUJmlm+9oqBFPGaDjPjI3eef6g9mt1OVJva8=; b=o6TVWHl0T2ZgwNTCaXmv2+MHe8rd9jV9AdhRMlei5ks08MdoBeZ36X9Q17rYul2tsW 8l/GrpHadWFXhDWg+ZaXLhn4qcnRk2XN1sXgyK1WksC7VN1sseGdLFFNNtRoLvsAd2NN Ctf/il+14GZO8TSI/AxdbhughzZVLsMqSV2Oh6YunF5gKp9ul7vGW0BhUnjKF/KDYuI5 Q8DISYYy/gUMN6T6moZacgt6HpGdPKQwDNYS//gVm2nWg1kx1n2P4bFbwFZz54n5GOfQ PCyNuYGc5UNcVEjqiWQSJoSdEdE5Kk5jgFnvJ2hQlKecViEDB4jWvvdOWcL+DIxTQC8S Zxyg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=4NvQc7ldUJmlm+9oqBFPGaDjPjI3eef6g9mt1OVJva8=; b=jsaa5hVCwIfBxYnuKaqTKvdDg2ZRcrvSHWJaBOmL1CcyVDb1Up7JX6f0SleF3srsSL XDv9mRe3cF3DKoOy8HQNWAjNlnELRrZjFCeU/wGwMvWmmo9ND/piRuyb5PjP9jwgVB3B Blg0ILCPSK3U8DJOsibhng0j72KTcRsPTCys+mxoY4qt5IHb7aW7MFc/wtqPGdhOQxbK yqGCMKsrlBWe50QyO9nZgAMMOUtYJUFadi4d6aUZlVBXY31lqyEAV75+K+fxpCvHcy+b wEkwkBvpR6pFBi82WvGdqoHCs1lqnRbLlMlKIcoxSZV27xLto9t0L6mcvO/Aw3NYQAPE brXg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530X7WvZGvAHy7PGoYozgoMtSubvQ1KRYQuQ3+5wUt0lYXcWEynz ofY9zx7zUK67vvwBuwGzEibNkQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz181C4SraDurq+omUYE4ikFA4wXlrmx50vrIbgXiuUshKXJGmpvdR3MkrcTmlddMKXr7V/DA==
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:58ce:: with SMTP id u14mr14702262qta.56.1604953315687; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 12:21:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mithrandir.lan (c-24-91-177-160.hsd1.ma.comcast.net. [24.91.177.160]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a1sm812876qtw.11.2020.11.09.12.21.54 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Nov 2020 12:21:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Message-Id: <784FA0E6-F446-4058-97CB-DEDF4D35DEBF@fugue.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0A181ACE-183B-4D11-A46C-242C0A79A7DF"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.20.0.2.21\))
Subject: Re: Market forces
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 15:21:53 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CAO42Z2wx2C0bvXbq-DGGt+jYDAsek=Ek7YAscPXW8FB114ec-g@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Simon Hobson <linux@thehobsons.co.uk>, 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>
To: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
References: <160409741426.1448.16934303750885888002@ietfa.amsl.com> <3c1c3ab5-5726-b141-e7ed-618984bbbdb1@gmail.com> <CABNhwV1zoZpZNjb54rEys4+49H3vpebZW2g9JbO1_58eR+WnQg@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr0vvyQnTGRoSh4qa4He1gq5HXXRaKU3pVLtCtDUzcwL_w@mail.gmail.com> <CABNhwV13gggo9XfRvrR31bCUptZuAiosK5ebMmnzDdinKqmrBw@mail.gmail.com> <B7B3091C-92E0-482A-8D16-AD6DCFD1E714@isc.org> <CAD6AjGSCnG_fyorW2-tEqzzTfj897Knf55-0QV9DPcDKt45VOA@mail.gmail.com> <F323E4EB-5AAA-4C34-9EA2-06D4A0839308@thehobsons.co.uk> <77C70939-13F9-4B04-BEF1-F6894EA1C09C@fugue.com> <CAO42Z2wx2C0bvXbq-DGGt+jYDAsek=Ek7YAscPXW8FB114ec-g@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.20.0.2.21)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/noP1pEB1gYz_42jhtZTrAMZkx6w>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 20:21:59 -0000

On Nov 9, 2020, at 2:47 PM, Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the current and existing need that wouldn't be being satisfied with a single /64 are things like a guest WIFI SSID in the home, or perhaps a kids SSID where Internet access policy can be applied.

That’s true, but the same caveat applies: right now, the ISP is giving the customer an IPv4 address, and so they can just do NAT. If IPv6 doesn’t work because they gave out a /64, right now they feel no pain. Later on, when they are trying to economize on IPv4 support, the pain will become more apparent, and then it’ll seem obvious and cheap to start giving out narrower PDs.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email