[120638] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ip-precedence for management traffic
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nick Hilliard)
Tue Dec 29 16:25:48 2009
X-Envelope-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 21:25:06 +0000
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
To: Joe Greco <jgreco@ns.sol.net>
In-Reply-To: <200912292110.nBTLA7RX029489@aurora.sol.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 29/12/2009 21:10, Joe Greco wrote:
> How do you offer a "cheaper" level of
> (let's say) Web-only Internet access, when the support costs will be
> higher? Where's the value? What's the business plan? Where's the profit
> in that?
As an unrelated footnote, these are questions which will become highly
relevant when RIR address space depletion occurs and when providers
initially believe that they can create viable product sets based on
provider NAT, once their v4 address space can no longer service their
customer base.
[As a further sub-note, the "believe" bit is not a statement of scepticism,
but rather a statement of fact; many providers will almost certainly
believe that end-users will swallow provider NAT, regardless of whether the
product models turn out to be viable or not.]
So, although it's a different context, I think you'll see the answer to
these questions in this context in the next couple of years.
Nick
