On 02/13/2012 12:45, David Conrad wrote: > On Feb 13, 2012, at 12:34 PM, Doug Barton wrote: >>> If an ISP can't use a shared block, they'll go ask their RIR for >>> a block - and given that they demonstrably have the need (lots of >>> customers), they will get it. Multiply than by N providers. >> >> If the RIRs do not deny these requests there is likely to be a >> revolt. OTOH that may be a good thing .... > > What grounds would an RIR have to deny this request? I haven't kept up to date on all of the RIRs' policies for granting requests, but I don't recall seeing "give me a huge block so that I can do CGN" as one of the established criteria. >>> - See CGN deployed using various hacks (e.g. squatting on space) >> >> Incredibly unlikely to happen. The ISPs are smart enough to know >> that this will cause them more headaches than its worth. > > You're joking, right? Ok, let's assume I'm wrong. Then there are 2 options: 1. They squat on space that causes them (and their customers) pain. I'm fine with that. Hopefully it will encourage their customers to move away, thus causing more pain for the ISP. 2. They squat on space that doesn't cause pain. I don't like that option, but it solves the problem, right? >>> - See CGN deployed using a block of space allocated for that >>> purpose >> If the IETF rightly denies this request then the ISPs are going to >> be forced to use the proper option, 1918 space. > > No. ISPs will do what makes business sense for them. Some of these > ISPs have already indicated that RFC 1918 won't work for them. I've already covered all the reasons I don't buy this in detail. Doug -- It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short. 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