Hi Eduard, While I'm sure we can all agree that resilient and reliable Internet access is a good thing, I think it is quite a leap from that to most small businesses both wanting it and having a realistic option. And then needing not just a ULA with a ridiculously low probability of prefix clashes on site merger events to needing a registered prefix that offers everything available from an RIR except for Internet routability.
I'm not convinced that the market either desires or needs registered ULAs. Regards, Leo On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 1:02 AM Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.edu...@huawei.com> wrote: > > Hi Leo, > Real resiliency is possible only if everything is redundant, including the > last mile. > What is the point to rent 2 fiber strands or 2 copper pairs in one cable? > This cable would be cut at the same time. The non-redundant L2 device that > has been used to connect this fiber may fail at the same time. > No one carrier in the world could double last-mile infrastructure. Access is > 70% of their cost. Access is always non-redundant. > Moreover, access itself is typically non-redundant (just aggregation > switches) couple of hops from the last mile. Well, some Carriers have > redundancy on the next nodes upstream. > > I am long enough on this market. I have seen many cases when different types > of businesses were trying to do redundancy for the Internet. > Of course, they prefer 2 different wireline providers, but in the majority of > cases, they do not have a choice between wireline providers. > Hence, the second link was 3GPP in most cases. > 3GPP could be from the same Carrier as PON, but I have never heard about good > coordination between wireline and wireless departments - they act as > independent Carriers. > > PS: In regards to anecdotes: > I am not hired/paid to collect proper information and prove anything here. > It is just my opinion based on my 25 years of experience. > > The real anecdote in the industry is that there is only ULA+NPT that works > for Internet site resiliency. > Everything else is broken for some reason. > Not many people know this anecdote. > > Eduard > -----Original Message----- > From: Leo Vegoda [mailto:l...@vegoda.org] > Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 5:39 PM > To: Vasilenko Eduard <vasilenko.edu...@huawei.com> > Cc: Nico Schottelius <nico.schottel...@ungleich.ch>; Marco Hogewoning > <mar...@ripe.net>; ipv6-wg@ripe.net > Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] Free GUA space for community projects [CfP/RFC] (was: > Minutes from the IPv6 WG @ RIPE 83) > > Hi Eduard, > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 12:10 AM Vasilenko Eduard > <vasilenko.edu...@huawei.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Leo, > > Almost any business (even small) would like to have Internet resiliency in > > the form of redundant connections through the different Carriers. > > That is not my experience. In my experience, small and medium sized business > owners would prefer to pay a little extra for a more resilient service from a > single provider than double up on the procurement, accounting, and equipment > needed when taking service from two different providers. I think my > experience is most true in areas where IP services tend to be provided over > infrastructure owned by a monopoly provider. > > Is there any research that can take us out of the realm of anecdote? > > Kind regards, > > Leo -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
