[113849] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Important New Requirement for IPv4 Requests
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ken A)
Wed Apr 22 09:54:29 2009
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 08:54:19 -0500
From: Ken A <ka@pacific.net>
To: Ricky Beam <jfbeam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <op.usrij1m3tfhldh@rbeam.xactional.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Ricky Beam wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 19:22:08 -0400, Ken A <ka@pacific.net> wrote:
>> Also, monthly bandwidth monitoring/shaping/capping are more easily
>> done using one ip per hosted domain...
>
> That's why the infrastructure is "virtualized" and you monitor at or
> behind the firewall(s) and/or load balancer(s) -- where it *is* one IP
> per customer. Sure, it's easier (and cheaper) to be lazy and waste
> address space than setup a proper hosting network.
>
I wasn't trying to point towards the 'right way', only adding to the
list of motivations that are out there, and being discussed here.
As ipv4 gets less cheap, and less easy to obtain, these motivations
cease. That's a good thing.
Ken
--
Ken Anderson
Pacific Internet - http://www.pacific.net
