[ipv6-wg] Re: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: Andre's guide to fix IPv6

On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 05:16:47PM +0100, Daniel Roesen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 05:36:11AM +1100, Geoff Huston wrote:
> > >> Interesting - it will work for a while, and then you will get to the 
> > >> limit of deployed capability of routing.
> > >>
> > >> Then what?
> > >
> > >You buy new routers.
> > 
> > So what you are saying is that _I_ want address portability and _you_ have 
> > to buy new routers.
> 
> No, what he's saying is "_you_ want _my_ business, so _you_ have to
> deliver what _I_ want. If you cannot deliver, there is no business for
> _you_".
> 
> ISPs do exist for customers, not customers do exist  to feed ISPs in the
> most convenient way for the ISPs. Some folks seem to forget that,
> looking at all the discussion trying to ignore the demand for real
> multihoming (and that includes TE and network-wide routing policy
> implementation, neither being delivered by things like shim6).

BTW... in Germany, the phone operators were forced to implement phone
number portability by law. The regulator didn't care about all the
whining from the telcos about that being impossible, uneconomic, the
world will explode etc. If they manage to get that imposed on the
traditional telcos, I wonder how much easier it will be to do that on
the ISPs.


Regards,
Daniel

-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr at cluenet.de -- dr at IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0