Re: [RRG] Consensus check: renumbering

[Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>]

Hi Dino,

I agree with you:

> I haven't voted because the question is not precise enough:

...

> If the question was:
> 
> Does a Locator/ID split solution require sites or core devices to
> renumber before it actually can work?
> 
> It would be easier to answer honestly.

Still, what kind of site does the question refer to?

  A site with a single PA IP address such as my DSL service?

  A large PA site - hundreds, thousands of addresses perhaps?

  A small PI site - whatever that means?

  A corporation or university PI site?


I think there is a hope that we can make progress by by asking
high-level questions and gaining rough consensus on an answer.  I
think there is also a temptation not to make questions too complex
in the hope of gaining agreement.

I agree with having broad, in-principle, high-level discussions to
try to break the hold of any fixed assumptions which might be
constraining more detailed discussions.

However, if the question is so lacking in specifics that no-one can
answer it clearly - or if we do gain consensus on an answer, but the
question open to very different interpretations - then I don't think
this is the way forward.

For instance, five different people could honestly answer the
current question in the same way - so it appears they agree.
However, if each has a significantly different understanding of what
a "site" is, then there is no actual consensus.

  - Robin


--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.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