> Which is exactly what they should do - actually before that one would > hope. This is not the "$200/hour chcklehead consultant"'s fault, that > is the design. > > Don't you love the idea of using 18446744073709551616 IP addresses to > number a point-to-point link? >
Let's not ignore that all IPv6 allocations are basically charged-for, so my expectation is that there will be fewer "idle" allocations that can't be recovered running around (when an org has to justify $36,000 per year [after 2012], forever, some bean counter may ask why... especially if they can get a "sensibly" sized allocation from their provider for a fraction of that cost). I'm not sure if that is cynical, or optimistic, but since the allocations are not free, there seems to be less incentive to squat. Deepak Jain AiNET
