nanog mailing list archives

Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?


From: Patrick Giagnocavo <patrick () zill net>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 23:32:14 -0400

Mark Andrews wrote:
In message <4BCD14EF.8090204 () zill net>, Patrick Giagnocavo writes:
Mark Andrews wrote:
In message <201004200022.o3K0M2Ba007459 () aurora sol net>, Joe Greco writes:
I haven't seen any such documents or regulations.
People purchaced the service on the understanding that they would
get a Internet address.  A address behind a NAT is not a Internet
address, it's a *shared* Internet address which is a very different
thing.
Given that many ISPs put their sign-up documents, including contracts,
on-line, you can no doubt supply a link to such a document that has
legal terms that would preclude NATed service, yes?

My recollection is only that I would be provided with "Internet service"
or "access to the Internet" .  No mention of RFC1918 space or other
distinguishing information was given.

Note in the below blurb no mention of publicly routable addresses...

It doesn't have to as the normal definition of a Internet address
is a publically routable internet address.  A address behind a NAT
is not a Internet address (Big I Internet).


(hope the attribution is not screwed up)

*ANY* valid Internet Protocol address is an "IP address" as mentioned in
the contract I quoted.  Including 192.168.99.2 .


If you supply something less than a full blown Internet access you
need to point out the restriction otherwise I would expect you to
be subject to "Bait and Switch" and other consumer protection laws.


You are charmingly naive about how "the law" actually works in the USA -
that is IMHO.

In any case, I left the large amount of quotes in to show that I (and
possibly Joe) are asking you for specific examples to support your
argument - and all you are offering is more of your personal opinion,
which is not an objective source of support for your position.

If I want that, I can go to any of *.livejournal.com, *.blogger.com , etc.

--Patrick




Current thread: