[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RRG] Consequences of no renumbering...
|The key, however, is completing transition.
When, exactly, would that be? Right after the v6 transition completes? ;-)
I suspect that the answer is 'never', in which case LISP is of zero benefit.
Putting aside the fact that LISP folk have offered a translation
approach to transition, if sufficient numbers are PTRs are deployed
there is incremental benefit. However, there is always this issue of a
tail in ANY transition. When was the last BGP3 speaker turned off? Is
it turned off?
However, you've asked a very simple question: paraphrasing, all other
things being equal would IT managers prefer not to renumber? The answer
of course is yes. But all other things are not equal, and there are
other factors as well. If we were to move quickly and standardize
approach we could conceivably have our cake and eat it too because it is
quite likely that EVERYONE is about to renumber once for IPv6. I am by
no means suggesting that we tie the transition of this new routing
technology to IPv6 but merely optimize in a potentially very salubrious way.
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg