[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [WG-BB] Draft documents from Tokyo meeting
At 01:08 01/06/27, Yoshihiro Obata wrote:
>At 00:37 01/06/27 +0900, Takashi Arano wrote:
>
>> >>Furthermore, in such a sense, the first allocation rule
>> >>can be applied also when allocating for new PoP.
>> >>Do you think if this is true?
>> >
>> >PoP is a part of a network and normally it is not a service.
>>
>>Of course. What I try to say in addition to your comments
>>is that when an existing ADSL ISP opens a new PoP,
>>the ISP can assign /24 per CMTS for this PoP.
>
> The size of wholesale and a PoP is much different. I am not sure whether we need to apply this rule to justify expansion of service areas. If we do so, we need some measurement and limit for the size.
OK. If other people agree with Obata-san, I will withdraw my additional
comments.
BTW, is it OK to incorporate Obata-san's idea to the proposal?
>> > When an ISP uses a wholesale ADSL provider, they need to allocate a large block of IP addresses to a completely independent network, which normally has a different allocation policy due to its nature of permanent connectivity.
>>
>>I do not understand what is difference in cases of using a wholesale
>>ADSL provider.
>
> In our case or NTT Flets service, a large ISP is expanding several thousand subscribers per month, which might increase a few more times by the end of this year. Nobody can estimate clearly such growth and what is worse is that it normally comes out from one PoP in Japan since they are combined with a backbone, which makes it more difficult to justify compared to dial up ISPs where you can distribute the network design among several PoPs.
I still don't understand. Our proposal assigns fixed size in the first time
just because of the reason Obata-san mentioned: difficulty of estimation.
Regards,
Takashi Arano
-
- This list (wg-bb) is handled by majordomo@lists.apnic.net
