[167160] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AT&T UVERSE Native IPv6, a HOWTO
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Scott Weeks)
Mon Dec 2 20:42:17 2013
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 17:41:55 -0800
From: "Scott Weeks" <surfer@mauigateway.com>
To: <nanog@nanog.org>
Reply-To: surfer@mauigateway.com
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--- owen@delong.com wrote:
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
I actually tend to doubt it. All of the people I've talked to from the major
operators have said that the charges in IPv4 were not a revenue source, they
were an effort to discourage the consumption of the addresses and/or the use
of static addresses and to try and recover the costs of dealing with them in
cases where customers were willing to pay.
------------------------------------------
Not jumping into the turd chunkin' contest, but this is not my experience.
The suits definitely want the money for income stream; small as it may be.
I'd like to hear from others if their experiences are different.
scott
