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/[email protected]/
[members-discuss] [Ticket#2012072401002649] Charging scheme discussion
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [Ticket#2012072401002649] Charging scheme discussion
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [Ticket#2012072401002649] Charging scheme discussion
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Erik Bais
erik at bais.name
Wed Jul 25 09:51:18 CEST 2012
Hi Alexey, I don't agree with your rational. Who are the ones with the largest (unused) supply of IP's .. The larger telco's. This will drive the cost for smaller LIR's, who don't have any already .. They don't care enough untill there is nothing left. That is when they will change to v6 or when their customers start complaining that they are on an intranet without ipv6, instead of the Internet. Regards, Erik Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad Op 25 jul. 2012 om 08:50 heeft LeaderTelecom Ltd. <info at leadertelecom.ru> het volgende geschreven: > > - Large (read as "rich") companies will be incentivised to accumulate > > more IPv4 "assets" in order to create a "closed shop", the access > > to which they control. > > It doesn't make sense. If cost of IPv4 will grow - this will stimulate ISP to switch to IPv6 faster. > > -- > Alexey Ivanov > LeaderTelecom Ltd. > ---- > If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss > mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: > https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view > > Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [Ticket#2012072401002649] Charging scheme discussion
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [Ticket#2012072401002649] Charging scheme discussion
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]