On tir, mai 29, 2007 04:42, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Thus spake "Roger Jørgensen" <roger@jorgensen.no> <snip> Anyone who is large enough to care about the extreme unlikelihood of collisions with ULA-L will be able to get PI, at least in ARIN's region. The bar is incredibly low; just about the only folks who don't qualify are people running home networks. And, for that matter, people can get a single PI block larger than /48, whereas someone who needs more than a /48 in ULA-C space would need multiple distinct blocks, presumably multiplying the fees to more than what PI costs.
without going into details, PA/PI space is really a waste to be used in a closed network that should never ever be directly connected to the public Internet. You can say we are building our own very closed version of Internet and other will be connected to us sooner or later. We need to know we have unique address space no mather how many other organization we connect with.
If your argument is that ULA-C will be cheaper, that is perhaps an argument that PI fees are too high -- not that anyone has stated if or how much cheaper ULA-C would be if it did pass. I have a hard time seeing anyone who has a legitimate need for ULA-C _or_ PI space whining about $100/yr. If they can't afford that, they can't afford anyone knowledgeable enough to care about the problems with ULA-L (or PA) space.
money isn´t on the table at all. It´s easier to get managment and other to understand that the addresses are unique with ULA-C than to explain how low the chances are to get a collission with ULA-L. It´s that easy. PI or PA or whatever you called it given out of the public routable address pool and to be used on a closed network is simply a waste. It´s that simple. -- ------------------------------ Roger Jorgensen | - ROJO9-RIPE - RJ85P-NORID roger@jorgensen.no | - IPv6 is The Key! -------------------------------------------------------