nanog mailing list archives
Re: Dynamic (changing) IPv6 prefix delegation
From: Robert Bonomi <bonomi () mail r-bonomi com>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 11:53:47 -0600 (CST)
Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> naively wrote:
On Nov 22, 2011, at 7:38 AM, Joel Maslak wrote:On Nov 22, 2011, at 8:05 AM, Ray Soucy <rps () maine edu> wrote:As long as a static allocation can be billed as a premium service, most providers will unfortunately do it.Exactly. ISPs are in business to make as much money as they can - go figure.How do you make more money by refusing to meet customer requests?
By 'encouraging' those 'high cost / low profit' customers to 'go elsewhere', and devoting the resources that they would otherwise consume to supporting 'lower-cost/ higher-profit' customers. This is 'no-brainer' free-market economics. :)
Current thread:
- Re: Dynamic (changing) IPv6 prefix delegation, (continued)
- Re: Dynamic (changing) IPv6 prefix delegation Owen DeLong (Nov 22)
- Re: Dynamic (changing) IPv6 prefix delegation Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 22)
- Re: Dynamic (changing) IPv6 prefix delegation Ray Soucy (Nov 22)
- Re: Dynamic (changing) IPv6 prefix delegation Owen DeLong (Nov 22)
- Re: Dynamic (changing) IPv6 prefix delegation Tim Franklin (Nov 22)
- Re: Dynamic (changing) IPv6 prefix delegation David Conrad (Nov 22)
- Re: Dynamic (changing) IPv6 prefix delegation Owen DeLong (Nov 22)
- Re: Dynamic (changing) IPv6 prefix delegation Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 22)
- Re: Dynamic (changing) IPv6 prefix delegation Owen DeLong (Nov 22)
- Re: Dynamic (changing) IPv6 prefix delegation Brielle Bruns (Nov 22)
- Re: Dynamic (changing) IPv6 prefix delegation Robert Bonomi (Nov 22)