On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 10:17, Pekka Savola wrote:
> > Real example: My ISP's DSL connection decides to drop the connection and
> > reconnect (with a new IPv4 address, and thus 6to4 prefix) every 1-3 hours. 
> > I'd rather not subject my internal network to that if I don't have to.
> 
> Switch ISP or complain to them.  I certainly wouldn't bear with that kind 
> of behaviour.
> 
> If that kind of ISP techniques are commonplace, we may need to do 
> something.  But I'm not sure if that's the case.  Experiences?

This is a business decision taken by many ISPs - in fact, many ISPs who
use dynamic addressing are starting to deliberately lower lease times
for dynamic IPs (1-3 days seem to be common these days, 1-3 hours does
seem on the short side), and implement mechanisms in their back-end
systems to be sure the user will NOT be able to renew a lease for the
same IP, but rather always be given a new one after this 1-3 day period
expires.

This way, you force any users who require permanent addressing
(typically users who wish to run servers on their home connections) to
buy your "premium" service rather than your $29.99/month-for-2Mbps
low-end product. 

After all, you don't want your $29.99/mo users to actually USE 2Mbps,
since then you will be selling your product with a loss (yes. really.),
so you force the users most likely to actually use your bandwidth, to
pay more for it. If you happen to be the incumbent or through other
means have near-monopoly in the local market, this becomes even more
attractive, as you don't need to worry that much about users switching
providers rather than upgrading to your premium product.

/leg


--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to