larger space was: Re: [NIC-....
pferguso at cisco.com
Thu Feb 15 21:09:49 UTC 1996
At 03:23 PM 2/15/96 -0500, Alan B. Clegg wrote:
>How exactly does a larger address space ease deployment of an ISP?
>"Current thinking" of who? Sure we should conserve space, but that was
>not my argument. My argument is that small ISPs are *NOT* going to
>cooperate to get larger blocks. They use any tactic to make themselves
>out to be 'larger fish' in that network bowl. Ever seen a nasty catfight
>between small local ISPs? I have. Not pretty. Cooperation? Not likely.
This is exactly the type of mentality that the address ownership
draft addresses, and without the word 'mandatory' appearing anywhere
in the text.
This attitude of non-cooperation is shameful.
More information about the NANOG