On 12/3/2011 5:26 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote:
> > From: Doug Barton <[email protected]>
>
> > 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
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
