Re: Allocations for "always-on" ISPs
- Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 15:40:16 +0200 (EET)
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Simon Skals wrote:
>Being an IP bloke with a conscience, I would personally hate to provide our
>regular home users with /29's. However, should our competitors start doing
>this, we would of course have to respond. It would be a shame, however, if
>the commercial struggles should end up leading to a swift exhaustion of
>IPv4 space.
Note that there are technologies available for always-on where you "only"
need one IP-address per customer, not a /29-subnet. It is still routed,
and they have no layer 2 connectivity. This works fine with eg ADSL.
Of course, some network scenarios require a subnet. But it is up to every
operator to decide what technology to use. RIPE could regulate this by
refusing to allocate addresses for /29-technologies for residential usage.
Just like they did in the past with allocating address space for
WWW-hosting, in favor of IP-less virtual hosting.
-- Janne
------------- Elcom ------------- Network Operations Center ---------
Jan-Erik Eriksson mailto: jee@localhost
Elcom phone: +358 18 23500
PB 233, Torggatan 10 fax: +358 18 14643
FIN-22100 Mariehamn URL: http://www.alcom.aland.fi
