[167211] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AT&T UVERSE Native IPv6, a HOWTO
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Wed Dec 4 14:53:04 2013
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <529F7557.3020607@inblock.ru>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 11:48:33 -0800
To: Nikolay Shopik <shopik@inblock.ru>
Cc: NANOG List <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Dec 4, 2013, at 10:32 , Nikolay Shopik <shopik@inblock.ru> wrote:
> On 04.12.2013 4:14, Mark Andrews wrote:
>> In message <529D9492.8020205@inblock.ru>, Nikolay Shopik writes:
>>> On 03/12/13 02:54, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>>> I have talked to my bean counters. We give out /48s to anyone who =
wants them and we don't charge for IPv6 add
>>> ress space.
>>>=20
>>> There is some ISP who afraid their users will be reselling their
>>> connectivity to other users around. While I didin't see that in =
years
>>> (probably last time in 2005) but still this exist in poor regions.
>>=20
>> And if they didn't resell it they probably wouldn't have a customer
>> in the first place. Unless you offer "unlimited" plans the ISP
>> isn't losing anything here. The bandwidth being used is being paid
>> for. If it isn't the ISP needs to adjust the price points to cover
>> their costs rather than hoping that people won't use all of the
>> bandwidth they have purchased.
>=20
> If we talk about end-user not business user, ISP assume 95th% load =
will
> be minimal so therefore it allow them to sell 100mbit for like 20-30$,
> while real price of it much higher.
Please tell me what provider is selling 100Mbit for $20-30 in the =
408-532-xxxx
area of San Jose, California.
Currently, the only provider capable of delivering more than 768k wired
here is charging me $100+/month for 30-50Mbps maximum.
I could get 100Mbps from them, but they want $250+/month for that.
If I can get 100Mbps for $20-30, I'd jump at it.
> If its big ISP they usually don't care, as there always be downloaders
> who saturate their link to 90% most time, but compare to most of other
> users in their net, this will be not noticeable. If its just smallish
> ISP things get harder for it.
For $100+/month, frankly, it's none of their business whether I'm =
pooling
my resources with my neighbors to pay for the connectivity or not.
>> This is like the whole tethered debate. Why should the ISP care
>> about which device the packets are source from. The customer is
>> buying so many gigabytes of traffic a month. They should be able
>> to use them anyway they see fit without actually breaking the laws
>> of the land.
>=20
> If you actually pay per bit, true or have some kind "fair usage"
> unlimited plan.
Which is pretty much all that is available any more.
>> I let my daughter's friends use the net at home here. If they burn
>> through my monthly allotment well then I need to pony up more money
>> or take a reduced service level until the month ends. It's none
>> of my ISP's concern how the bandwidth I have purchased from them
>> is being used.
>=20
> If you talk about wired connection, this thing almost non-existing =
here.
> Only apply to wireless 3G/4G ISPs with limited bits and then reduced
> service.
Not entirely sure what you are saying here. In this day and age, I don't =
see
any reason that wireless providers should get a free pass or be able to =
sustain
significantly worse policies than wireline providers. Wireless bandwidth =
is
rapidly approaching parity with wired bandwidth pricing at consumer =
levels.
> Some even come up with idea two separate /64 make things easier :-D,
> instead just put at least round /60
Actually, providing a separate /64 for the provider link makes a lot of =
sense.
It really is best to pull that out of a separate provider aggregate =
across all
the subscribers in the same aggregation group than to carve individual
link prefixes out of each subscribers internal-use prefix.
For example, if you get a tunnel from HE, then, by default, you get a =
/64
from our link block for the tunnel broker to which you connect and an =
additional
/64 for your internal use by default. If you click the "please give me a =
/48" checkbox,
then you'll also get an additional /48.
We do this because it makes our provisioning easier and allows us to =
support
users that want prefixes as well as users whose equipment (or brains) =
can't
handle more than a single /64 for their LAN.
There's really NOTHING to be gained from providing anything in between a =
/64
and a /48, so we don't do it.
Owen
