IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability WGLC

"Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> Thu, 01 October 2015 07:59 UTC

Return-Path: <fred@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 078ED1B2B9B for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 00:59:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -112.612
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-112.612 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 AAkKU-WAQpRZ for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 00:59:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50EA11B2B94 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 00:59:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=970; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1443686380; x=1444895980; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=/uqb1CJre/MLfJ7zE4lZmlay+4Mecytkp7WqVAFzn+0=; b=mgCKCRm3BMpyLcao0n3rAEdqgHjfYSPQirCaagWjcatZwcnb5Hi+Aiju UUTnOwcGpJYADPnh/VYXnHYbDg9oidu5DqIOnkMODdsqOchcl1nkMgFTR QPMHUOznsRqdPtk5j4nBy35NIyzojHn+aLCDuXoJNXwa4JuyuQ5K2VsYv o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DvAQDv5gxW/5tdJa1egyeBQga5RYQhAQ2HdAKBLzgUAQEBAQEBAYEKhCQBAQEDATo/BQsCAQgYHhAhESUCBA4FiBkDCgjGRw2FDQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAReJA4JuglCCCjMHgxiBFAEElXkBiyKBcZQLh0cBHwEBQoIRHYFUcYhygQYBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,616,1437436800"; d="scan'208";a="36666338"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Oct 2015 07:59:39 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-011.cisco.com (xch-rtp-011.cisco.com [64.101.220.151]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t917xdgN015446 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 1 Oct 2015 07:59:39 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) by XCH-RTP-011.cisco.com (64.101.220.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 03:59:38 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-013.cisco.com ([64.101.220.153]) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com ([64.101.220.153]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 03:59:38 -0400
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability WGLC
Thread-Index: AQHQ7k4GdXDL2sFAh0exNhAwtjJ+OA==
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 07:59:38 +0000
Message-ID: <0C8D82CD-577C-4C22-B760-D856F8B9B9CF@cisco.com>
References: <201509131800.t8DI03cc026651@irp-lnx1.cisco.com> <CAJE_bqdjg+2iT6LzmmFhwvoxq8w41s4CzmD2mvJ2Auy1K0s_Rg@mail.gmail.com> <55FB2607.1010506@gmail.com> <55FC5D78.4070008@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <55FC5D78.4070008@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.20.245]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <768A10A5A3048840AD16AD68ED574AC3@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/-i0nTfFRsOOtm6EiDL3r2Qm4QlQ>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability WGLC
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 07:59:44 -0000

> On Sep 18, 2015, at 11:52 AM, Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> However, it may be imposed as a crude load management system. So
>> maybe the draft should point out that the number of IP addresses is
>> not a proxy for the traffic load.

Agree that someone might be trying to manage load. But I suspect it's more about revenue generation. Example: I recently took a cruise on Royal Caribbean (which is a five star hotel on a barge), and paid five star hotel prices for Internet access (well, not really; we didn't buy it). The first device was $15/day, the second was half that, and there wasn't a third device price. Not sure what would have happened if my device had wanted to change its IP address daily (is that a MAC address or an IP address?). I think they saw it as a revenue source, and weren't especially thinking about the amount of space segment or ship-to-shore microwave they were using.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email