> > word salad
None of this has anything to do with why the IPv4 /24 limit is what it is. Good luck with your endeavors, whatever they may be. On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 1:46 PM VOLKAN SALİH <volkan.salih...@gmail.com> wrote: > thanks for your response. Honestly thanks for everyones reponses. > > comunism is the future. IMO. > > tier-1 network count is decreasing. competition is always good. while > monopoly, duopoly, triopoly is not.. I dream an earth with 1000 tier-1 > networks.. > > capitalism give people more money than they can spend in their lifetime > with their families, but it doesnt give people happiness and health.. > > for example, if i were level3 or telia CEO or should I have been major > stakeholder? I would like to see 50 or 1000 more tier-1 networks competing > with us. > > Money is not everything. After some time capitalist bourgeois realize that > they could not "earn" health or happiness and start spending their pennies > to charities, > > because if we wouldnt believe heaven and hell and purgatory, what else we > could believe? Should we believe that after death nothing left from the > earth, we worked for nothing, we laughed for nothing, we cried for nothing, > and we married for nothing? > > NOPE. > > Everyone is equal, in the god's/lord's/creator's vision. You need to work > on comunism instead of capitalism.. > > I do not care what CFO/CTO/CEO/CXO thinks! they are more miserable than > me..! I am healthy and happy. They are not. They can not be. I just > expressed my opinions, finalized them with a bad joke. ;D > > You can continue your feasibility reports, net profit margin , return of > investment calculations, but the god doesnt care IMO, and you will not care > after you are 70-80 years.old. > > Best regards and wishes for you all > > I guess i made myself clear. > > Development is the only way. in all aspects. > 29.09.2023 20:31 tarihinde Matthew Petach yazdı: > > > > On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 9:42 AM VOLKAN SALİH <volkan.salih...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> [...] >> >> I presume there would be another 50 big ASNs that belong to CDNs. And I >> am pretty sure those top 100 networks can invest in gear to support /25-/27. >> > > Volkan, > > So far, you haven't presented any good financial reason those top 100 > networks should spend millions of dollars to upgrade their networks just so > your /27 can be multihomed. > > Sure, they *can* invest in gear to support /25-/27; but they won't, > because there's no financial benefit for them to do so. > > I know from *your* side of the table, it would make your life better if > everyone would accept /27 prefixes--multihoming for the masses, yay! > > Try standing in their shoes for a minute, though. > You need to spend tens of millions of dollars on a multi-year refresh > cycle to upgrade hundreds of routers in your global backbone, tying up > network engineering resources on upgrades that at the end, will bring you > exactly $0 in additional revenue. > > Imagine you're the COO or CTO of a Fortune 500 network, and you're meeting > with your CFO to pitch this idea. > You know your CFO is going to ask one question right off the bat "what's > the timeframe for us to recoup the cost of > this upgrade?" (hint, he's looking for a number less than 40 months). > If your answer is "well, we're never going to recoup the cost. It won't > bring us any additional customers, it won't bring us any additional > revenue, and it won't make our existing customers any happier with us. But > it will make it easier for some of our smaller compeitors to sign up new > customers." I can pretty much guarantee your meeting with the CFO will end > right there. > > If you want networks to do this, you need to figure out a way for it to > make financial sense for them to do it. > > So far, you haven't presented anything that would make it a win-win > scenario for the ISPs and CDNs that would need to upgrade to support this. > > > ON a separate note--NANOG mailing list admins, I'm noting that Vokan's > emails just arrived a few minutes ago in my gmail inbox. > However, I saw replies to his messages from others on the list yesterday, > a day before they made it to the general list. > Is there a backed up queue somewhere in the NANOG list processing that is > delaying some messages sent to the list by up to a full day? > If not, I'll just blame gmail for selectively delaying portions of NANOG > for 18+ hours. ^_^; > > Thanks! > > Matt > >
