Re: Consensus Call: draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request

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

 



On 12/3/2011 5:26 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>     > From: Doug Barton <dougb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
>     > there is nothing to stop customers from using the new block internally
>     > ...
>     > because the pain of dealing with customers who are using your CGN block
>     > internally is going to exist anyway, why not just use the least popular
>     > 1918 block(s) for this purpose and deal with the conflicts when they
>     > arise?
> 
> That's definitely something to think about.
> 
> One point the other way is that in using 1918 space in their sites, customers
> are doing _nothing wrong_ - in fact, they are doing just what the spec says
> they should do. On the other hand, a customer using CGN space in their site
> _would_ be doing something that's counter to a spec. I'm not sure how much
> good that will be for an ISP dealing with an upset customer, but it might be
> of some value.

This argument has been raised before, but IMO the value is exactly zero.
The fact that you have a finger to wag at someone doesn't make the costs
of dealing with the conflict any smaller.


Doug

-- 

		"We could put the whole Internet into a book."
		"Too practical."

	Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
	Yours for the right price.  :)  http://SupersetSolutions.com/

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


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