Re: misunderstanding scale

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Mar 24, 2014, at 10:12 PM, Alexander Lopez <alex.lopez () opsys com> wrote:

> > On Mar 24, 2014, at 9:36 AM, Alexander Lopez <alex.lopez () opsys com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > not to mention the cost in readdressing your entire network when you
> > change an upstream provider.
> > > Nat was a fix to a problem of lack of addresses,  however, the use of
> > private address space 10/8, 192.168/16 has allowed many to enjoy a simple
> > network addressing scheme.
> >
> > This is easily and better solved in IPv6 using provider independent addressing
> > which is readily available.
> <rant>
> Yes but the number of people needing just a /64 will far outnumber the one requesting a /48.

Businesses? I doubt it.

> I would say that the majority of users today and for the future will not require a /48, but will simply use the 
> allocation given to them by their upstream. 

Perhaps, but I don’t see that being just one subnet for anyone at all likely to have a concern about renumbering.

> Many today do not multi-home and how many SMB customers just use a single Public IP behind a NAT device?

Those wouldn’t really have a problem renumbering their network.

> It is easy for us on this list to use or request PIA, but what about the 10 person office?

I’ve done so for several. It’s not hard or expensive.

Owen