Subject: Re: [midcom] WG scope/deliverables

From: "J. Noel Chiappa" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 01:20:29 -0500

> From: "David R. Conrad" <[email-masked]>

    > IPv6 does not solve the need to renumber if you change providers ...
    > Until that issue is addressed, there will be NATs.  Even for v6.

Oh, I can't resist:

It's completely appalling that when I move to a new house, my street address
changes. It's such a hassle; I have to tell all my friends to update their
address books, get new business cards, etc, etc, etc. Why do I have to change
street addresses just because I moved? Can't ICANN^H^H^H^H^H the US Post
Office fix this? No? Well, clearly they are in the pay of some evil nasty
multi-nationals (or they *are* an evil, nasty multi-national). I demand a
Congressional hearing at once! It's all a US Government plot to shaft the rest
of the world! The UN needs to look into this!

</Rant>

As long as IPv6 has only one namespace to say *who* you are, as well as
*where* you are, your address will change when you change providers. As the
old hackers say, "That's not a bug, that's a feature."

	Noel

---

From: Ed Gerck <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 10:01:16 -0800

> of the world! The UN needs to look into this!

Actually, in the UK you can do just what you wish ;-)
You give a name to your house (say, "The Tulip") and
the post office knows where The Tulip is. If you move,
you can do the same at your new location, provided
there is no conflict.  This seems to be more similar to the
notion of using an IP number as a name -- but isn't this
why we need DNS? ;-)

Cheers,

Ed Gerck

PS: BTW, urban legend says that in the UK if you name your house
"NOT IN SERVICE" you may actually get no water/electricity bills
because clerks purportedly use that tag for houses not in service.

---

From: V Guruprasad <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 14:36:45 -0500

> there is no conflict.  This seems to be more similar to the

I suspect it only works in rural areas - I recall walking past 27A Wimpole Street
and humming the rain in spain. Back where I grew up, the village postmen not only
deliver without numbers, but read the letters too for those who can't :)

> notion of using an IP number as a name -- but isn't this

Beg to differ - the reason we need the DNS is because its hierarchy mirrors
instead of routing. If it (the hierarchy) did routing, it (the DNS) wouldn't
be mirroring and that might change the loading/scalability issues with the DNS.

-prasad

---

From: "David R. Conrad" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 22:59:10 -0800

Noel,

At 01:20 AM 2/15/2001 -0500, J. Noel Chiappa wrote:
>Why do I have to change
>street addresses just because I moved?

A very good reason your name is separate from your address.

Good thing you didn't choose telephone numbers in your rant, huh?

In any event, my point (in case you missed it before getting wound up for 
your rant) was that people find renumbering hard will choose not to 
renumber given the choice.  NAT provides them a choice, like it or not (I 
personally don't care -- I see NAT as a tool with advantages and 
disadvantages like any other tool).

>*where* you are, your address will change when you change providers.

Yes.  It astonishes me how many people have been unable to grasp this and 
assume that magic happens when you go from 32 bits to 128 bits.

>As the

The bug is that who and where are not separated, but I suspect you won't 
argue with that.

Rgds,
-drc