From owner-freebsd-isp Wed Oct 9 16:37:34 1996 Return-Path: owner-isp Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA18461 for isp-outgoing; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 16:37:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns2.harborcom.net (dunn@ns2.harborcom.net [206.158.4.4]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA18455 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 16:37:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (dunn@localhost) by ns2.harborcom.net (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA01862; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 19:35:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 19:35:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Bradley Dunn To: Tony Kimball cc: jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, isp@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Question about networks In-Reply-To: <199610091932.OAA21809@compound.Think.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-isp@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, Tony Kimball wrote: > Quoth Bradley Dunn on Wed, 9 October: > : I think any plan to charge for address space has to be accompanied by > : charges per route. If not, what are the incentives to aggregate? > : > : For example, let's say that an organization needs a /16. Let's say there > : is a market for addresses, but they find it is cheaper to buy 256 /24s > : instead of buy one /16. What is the incentive for them to get the /16? > > On the other hand, in practice one would certainly expect 256 /24s to > be substantially more expensive than one /16. Why? If you have a /16 and individual /24s are going for more than a /16, why would you sell it as a /16 instead of selling the individual /24s? If anything, I would think a /16 would cost more, because it would be more desirable than 256 /24s in the case of route filters or route charges. > I'd also very much like to hear more about IPX proxies. http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/751/ij/home.html is one. -BD