Jeroen Massar wrote: > ... > Talking about that, maybe a clause in some document should > hint ISP's to start billing based on traffic consumption and > not on IP usage. "IP usage" is a unmeasurable thing when the > endsite gets a /48 unless the ISP is going to sniff all the > packets and account them that way instead of based on the > circuit counters. This would at least hint them that endsites > should really get a /48 and not just a single /128. > Personally I would shoot ISP's who did not follow that > convention. Then again one can always ask them why the peep > they requested a TLA in the first place if they are not going > to give their endsites /48's.
Demand RFC 3041 support for your devices. > > <SNIP> > > > I'm all in favour of an 'SL considered harmful'. However, > > there are several situations were SL is exactly what is > > appropriate, and it seems an odd philosophy to deprecate > > power-saws because they shouldn't be used in place of drills. > > With the above 2 drafts in mind we only will be deprecating > the current version of SL. One, or a merger, of the above > two drafts will make the power saws into a workable saw > which doesn't smash up the wood (ambiguity) nor doesn't > need any power (registration). Wrong, because they are not defining /48's. Tony -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
