Subject: [RRG] Renumbering and Renumbering

From: RJ Atkinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 17:54:02 -0400

It seems to me that Tony is correct that we have consensus
that the currently implemented and deployed tools for
renumbering are inadequate.

I also think Tony is correct that this adversely impacts
virtually all classes of future architecture that have been
discussed seriously within the Routing RG so far.

The various counter-claims that various folks have posted
recently each seem far from obvious to me.  If those claims
are valid, then the existing explanations aren't sufficiently
clear and complete to be really persuasive.

So it seems to me that we are back at a familiar place
-- "Renumbering Needs Work".

So folks who are inclined to advocate for one approach
over another might want to go see what renumbering
technologies they can invent/discover that would make
renumbering really practical within the context of the
architecture(s) they are advocating.

Other folks might want to think much more generally
about what new approaches to renumbering can be either
invented or discovered.

I am optimistic that new approaches can be devised.
I'm not a cynic that thinks the community has to
remain in the "renumbering is hard and painful" neighborhood
permanently (nor even remain their for my working lifetime).
[All this is why I think that PI address space has never
really been a functional requirement, but instead is a
current workaround for the technology gaps in renumbering.]

Brian Carpenter and I had talked about renumbering offline
within the past fortnight.  We plan to put together a draft
describing the tools already deployed and where we see gaps.
Maybe an updated document of that sort can help focus folks
research into the most problematic areas.

Cheers,

Ran

--
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