John, On Dec 5, 2011, at 1:13 PM, John C Klensin wrote: > this is a much stronger argument for a "dear customer, either renumber or > upgrade your > hardware" position
I'd imagine the vast majority of the customers of ISPs who are facing this issue would react either with anger or non-comprehension if presented with such a position. If you were running such a network, would you risk it? > than for an allocation that will force that > "renumber or upgrade" position as soon as, e.g., ISPs merge or > discover a need for an extra layer or CGN. I'm confused: why would an ISP merge/extra layer of CGN for the ISP to relay that position to their customers? My impression is that we're talking about ISP-side (only) . I'd think this would be handled by the ISP changing the IP address on the WAN side of the CPE via normal provisioning systems if/whern collisions occur with the merged/layered network. Regards, -drc _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
