[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > NO - Do NOT Deprecate Site-Local Addressing. > > There are reason to use site-locals, and reason NOT to use them. But > "FORBIDDING" people will only alienate them and lead them to > find ways to do it anyway. > > Perfect example, when (or should I say IF) my home ISP goes > to IPv6, they charge per IP. Always have, and always will. > Sure, they will gladly give me a range of IPs, as well as > gladly charge me as if each were a PC. Also, > when I get tired of putting up with the abuse from this > particular ISP and decide to choose another ISP to abuse me, > I will still have the same issue.
Very good example that you don't get it at all. ISP's should be charging for traffic, not for IP's. They pay for traffic to their upstreams not for IP addresses. IP addresses only have a registration cost. Just like when you sign up to the service. There is no reason for keeping SL unless you imply that you are going to NAT anyways. If you intend to do that stay with IPv4. Or: stay in your soap box ;) Greets, Jeroen -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
