Re: The renumbering problem [Re: [BEHAVE] Comments on the NAT66 draft]

[Gert Doering <gert@space.net>]

Hi,

On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:22:14PM -0600, james woodyatt wrote:
> I am so *so* tired of making excuses for bad code.  Just once, I'd  
> like to be able to say, "I see your coders thought it would be a good  
> idea to store IP addresses in a persistent store without any cache  
> coherency protocol, and now you can't renumber your network without  
> eating the time and expense of qualifying a radical new implementation  
> of your hugely business-critical software application.  You know  
> what?  That's your own fault.  Not ours.  p.s. I bet you'll read that  
> tech-note next time, right?"

OK, I bite.  What answer do you give to folks that need to renumber
things like site-to-site VPN endpoints, which affects lots of configuration 
to be changed by *other* folks (their VPN peers)?

This happens to be the one of the main issues being brought forward by
people that want stable addresses.

(I'll go through the draft itself some time tomorrow)

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  128645

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444            USt-IdNr.: DE813185279