[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?]





--On Wednesday, September 24, 2003 08:41:14 -0700 Michel Py
<michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> wrote:

>> I had been living in bliss
> 
> A too common problem within the IETF. Maybe it would be useful for some
> people here to actually get out in the real world.

We more typically escape to bliss, at a cost, because we've seen what the
Consumer-grade "Internet" is, and want none of it. 

I have a small-business-grade DSL at home, costing around 5 times as much
as consumer (and that is with the discaount!), but I get a /27 and RFC2317
style delegation. It is bliss, but it should not be exceptional, it should
be the norm -- because it is immensely empowering. I want my fellow humans
to feel that, too, which is why I'm fighting for it. 

-- 
Måns Nilsson            Systems Specialist
+46 70 681 7204         KTHNOC  MN1334-RIPE

We're sysadmins. To us, data is a protocol-overhead.

Attachment: pgp00062.pgp
Description: PGP signature