Subject: Re: [RRG] Renumbering...

From: Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 17:06:53 +0200

Hi Christian,
> To answer the question Tony has raised, it may be useful to get some
> common ground on:
>
> (1) What are the renumbering tasks, and which cause most problems?
>
> (2) Which renumbering tasks could be eliminated?
>
> (3) How much more acceptable would renumbering become if some of the
>     renumbering tasks were eliminated?
>
> Let me take a first step in answering questions (1) and (2). 

Suggest we review RFC 4192 which went into this in quite some depth for 
IPv6 (and the effort is similar for IPv4).  A system that requires 
substantial amounts of renumbering is likely to tie itself to the IPv6 
migration, because you can bet enterprise managers aren't going to want 
to do that twice if they can at all avoid it.  Any system that 
diminishes renumbering requirements will be looked upon favorably.  Your 
item (d) is indeed troublesome, by the way.

Eliot

--
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