Re: Stupid NAT tricks and how to stop them.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





--On Thursday, March 30, 2006 19:30 +1200 Andrew McGregor <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Your ISP charges you 9 times as much for IPv4 addresses as
they do for bandwidth?  I'd recommend switching ISPs.  All
the ones I've seen   charge a
small premium for additional IP space, but it's never more
than   about a 50% premium.

Not if you don't live in the US.  There are no options here
that are  at all cheap.  Usually you get a flat "we don't do
that".  And they  don't do v6 either.

If it makes you feel better (it probably won't), in much of the US, the story from the ISPs goes like this:

	* We don't do that on our residential service, if you
	want _any_ IPv4 addresses assigned to you, you need to
	buy the commercial service.
	
	* The commercial service costs around ten times as much
	as the residential one for similar bandwidth _less_
	service (often no free email, free web hosting, "user
	protection" software tools, etc.)

	* If you want more than one address on the commercial
	service, you will pay some small incremental charge for
	it.  But the real incremental charge starts at address
	number 1 and is tied up with the "type of service" shift.

However, we need to keep something else in mind, which Iljitsch's note hints at. If I'm an ISP trying to sell a low-end service to low-end customers at a low (but still profitable) price, I need to cut customer support costs to the absolute minimum. If someone calls up for help with a configuration problem, that may be six month's of profits from that customer eaten up in the cost of answering the call. To that sort of ISP, NATs, and ISP-supplied routers that support NATs, have a _huge_ advantage, which is that all supported customer LANs are identical -- same design, same exact internal addresses, etc. That is very important from a support standpoint -- length of calls, skill levels required, ability to construct clear FAQs and avoid calls entirely, and so on.

For the community, there are elements of "you get what you pay for" in this. And, for the ISPs, unless we figure out ways to provide the same level of support convenience with public addresses, we will certainly see NATs with IPv6 as well as IPv4.

    john



_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]