Re: [RAM] First cut at routing & addressing problem statement

JFC Morfin <jefsey@jefsey.com> writes:

> At 22:24 31/07/2007, Thomas Narten wrote:
> >We intended the term "site" to be a fairly general term, one that
> >includes pretty much any topologically distinct thing that connects to
> >the internet. This includes home users. It is also NOT restricted to
> >just larger enterprises or ASes. We'll add a clarifying definition to
> >the document.

> Dear Thomas,
> I am sorry but "5. Provides meaningful benefits to the parties who 
> bear the costs of deploying and maintaining the technology." is an 
> error. What we want is to provide meaningful benefits to the users.

Sure. But if you provide benefits to users, but the cost of providing
those benefits is carried by others (who do not themselves see the
benefits), by what means does one actually force the cost on those
others? There is no free lunch. We can't make parties do things they
don't want to. One thing we should have learned by now is that forcing
others to bear unfunded mandates (to benefit another party) all to
often results in technology that simply never gets deployed.

So, if we actually want something to be deployed, it would be
advisable to have the technology be of a type that those who have to
pay the costs also see the benefit, so that they have incentive to pay
the cost.

Thomas

_______________________________________________
RAM mailing list
RAM@iab.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram