Chuck Anderson wrote: >> There is no reason for an ISP to hand >> out IPv6 addresses one /128 at a time. They would be creating a >> management nightmare for themselves and hurting their customers.
True enough. But just like the old days when Ma Bell used to run ringer-equivalency tests on subscriber lines to detect people "cheating" by installing "non-approved" devices in their homes, the new Ma Bell will find it rather easy to detect & charge for additional routable devices. Given the ease of tacking on extra fees for something that can be whipped together by one of their techs in a bash script or router ACL rule in a matter of a few minutes, no doubt we'll be seeing a lot of new billable "services" that come with the rollout of IPv6. IPv4 NAT makes such verification more or less impossible at the upstream ISP side. That's one thing I like about the status quo. -rich _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
