Subject: Re: [RRG] Renumbering...

From: David Conrad <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 13:45:49 -0700

On Sep 3, 2008, at 10:18 AM, Tony Li wrote:
> If PI is available, then all users will tend to cling to it,  
> avoiding any
> other possible solution.  Our entire job is to give them an  
> alternative.

Or, we provide a mechanism that allows the users to continue to use  
their 'PI addresses' but disassociates the network topological  
significance from those 'addresses'.

I'm with Noel here about being depressed.  I fear discussions about  
changing business models or forcing users to deploy IPv6ng or define  
new APIs and demand OS vendors and application writers to rewrite  
their code yet again is, to quote Noel, "an utter waste of time".  It  
has been two years since the IAB Amsterdam workshop kicked off this  
round of RRG and as far as I can tell, there hasn't been consensus on  
much of anything other than we should "do it right".

I've asked in the past but have not gotten an answer:  what are the  
constraining assumptions RRG is working under in terms of timeframes  
and infrastructure replacement?

Thanks,
-drc

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] 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