This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/members-discuss@ripe.net/
[members-discuss] [Ticket#2011100401000175] Proposed 2012 Charging scheme, Board comments
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] Proposed 2012 Charging scheme, Board comments
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] Proposed 2012 Charging scheme, Board comments
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
LeaderTelecom Ltd.
info at leadertelecom.ru
Tue Oct 4 04:35:53 CEST 2011
Hello! > My personal opinion is that, being IPv4 a scarse resource, the big > systems/telco (who holds most of the content in most cases) should be > pushed to implement IPv6 asap. And that would happen only with an > aggressive (exponential) IPv4 fee plan that discourage the use of IPv4 > address space. In Russia big telco tell us that they have troubles with using IPv6. Often often the manufacturer write that IPv6 supported, but it doesn't work. And any aggressive fee plan will just increase costs and will not help with developing network. I think that big providers will make changes only when IP-adddresses in IPv4 will be finished. In this case telecom will request IPv6 support. -- Alexey S Ivanov General Director LeaderTelecom Ltd. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20111004/be5556e2/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] Proposed 2012 Charging scheme, Board comments
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] Proposed 2012 Charging scheme, Board comments
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]