CloudFlare IPv6 BGP announcements - WTF guys?
jared at puck.nether.net
Tue Jul 17 15:32:08 CEST 2012
On Jul 17, 2012, at 9:09 AM, Phil Mayers wrote:
> On 07/17/2012 01:53 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>> off my lawn/routing table" but there are real costs of these entries
>> in the RIB + FIB. I would rather not see a model where you're billed
>> based on your pollution,
> Question: why not?
> Genuinely curious here; charging a customer a scaled fee for number of routes injected seems like a pretty reasonable thing to me. What am I missing?
Should I be billing based on the 95%tile of routes seen from the session, or the peak/min/max ? I would say the max, since that's the highest cost.
As a buyer of internet services, you want a predictable cost (to some extent) so you can budget and manage it appropriately.
Adding another variable feels like "evil telco" charge you for whatever I can get away with mode. It also would take some time to have customers sign new contracts with such terms...
More information about the ipv6-ops