Re: initial issues

[Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>]

Steve;

> > > Given that v6 has hooks for magical (re-)numbering,...
> >
> >An irony is that outside the inner circle of v6, no one believes
> >in the magic.
> 
> No one inside "the inner circle" believes we have renumbering magic either.
> It's one of those hardy myths.
> 
> We have mechanisms that we think will make *some* aspects of renumbering
> *easier* than in IPv4.  That's not at all the same as saying renumbering
> will always be easy, trivial, or magical with IPv6, and so let's not
> operate under that delusion here, OK?

Thank you for politically correct wording.

However, you are still technically wrong.

Renumbering is treated almost entirely by DNS that there is no essential
difference between 4 and 6.

There could have been a very small benifit for 6, if address
boundary to subscribers is fixed at, say, /48.

I proposed so several years ago and the WG decided to keep it flexible
without much discussion.

Last year, you all recognize it a stupid decision and the boundary is
now fixed at /48.

As the person who proposed it, I can say the difference is so
insignificant that renumbering is not made easier.

It's not a problem because the fixed boundary has other benefits.

And, now, it's so amusing to see the same stupidity is repeated
on TLA/NLA.

						Masataka Ohta