RE: Draft: PI addressing derived from AS numbers

["J. Noel Chiappa" <jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu>]

    > From: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>

    > But what they mainly want, as far as I can see is independence

If people wanted a namespace that was independent of topology, they should
have put one into the architecture when it was first designed.

Routing-names in a global-scale network will *always* depend on network
location.

The only namespace IPv6 has (other than DNS names) are addresses, which are
routing-names.

If an architecture without a namespace which is independent of topology in
unacceptable, then people have to either i) radically modify IPv6, or ii)
junk it.

Is a namespace with independence really absolutely required? If so, saying
tbat is equivalent to saying you have to either radically modify IPv6 (so
it supports that), or junk it (since it doesn't).

"We are a lighthouse. Your call."

	Noel