On October 7, 2019 at 23:13 o...@delong.com (Owen DeLong) wrote:
>
>
> > On Oct 7, 2019, at 20:16 , b...@theworld.com wrote:
> >
> >
> > Well if you all really want your heads to explode I was invited to
> > give a talk a few years ago in Singapore at the local HackerSpace.
> >
> > It called for something creative and different, not really an IETF
> > sort of crowd.
> >
> > So I proposed we dump numeric addresses entirely and use basically
> > URLs in IP packets and elsewhere.
> >
> > I really meant something like 'IP://www.TheWorld.com' in the
> > source/dest addr, possibly more specific for multiple interfaces but
> > whatevs.
>
> It doesn’t break my brain, but it really doesn’t make a lot of sense when
> you get down to it.
No, doesn't break your brain, but then you proceed to look at an
electric car and protest "but where do you put the gasoline?!" (i.e.,
describe current routing architecture.)
Yes, Owen, given my admittedly off-beat (isn't that how I introduced
it?) proposal some things would have to change, as I said in the note
you were responding to, more than once.
>There’s also the issue that prefixes of that address format don’t tend to
>aggregate well.
>
>I’m betting that not all of the WWW addresses go to the same ASN.
Perhaps you have noticed in your vast travels that domain names'
significance is generally read right to left not left to right like IP
addresses?
I did finish with:
> I'd agree the idea is several RFCs short of an internet but hey it's
> something to think about.
My main point is, as I said, Bits is Bits, whether they're human
readable (for some value of "human") like URLs or long hex strings
which perhaps are less human readable.
The only non-negotiable criteria is whether a given bitstring choice
is sufficiently unique to indicate routing endpoints.
It's not 1990 any more, a TB of RAM now costs a few thousand dollars
and is dropping rapidly (similar for fancy router RAM), we have
processor chips with 64 cores available practically off the shelf for
under $10K (32-core literally off the shelf, try any Microcenter),
etc. etc. etc.
It might be reasonable to think about how we might take advantage of
what we've learned in 30 years, particularly starting with the premise
that IPv6 adoption isn't doing very well. Perhaps we can do better.
I'm not quite sure the knee-jerk reaction "but we're neck deep in the
big muddy, we must continue forward! look at how long and how much
trouble it took us to get even neck deep!" should be dispositive.
P.S. My prediction?
The world's major telcos et al, having had enough of various problems,
from address exhaustion to non-stop security disasters, and the
chaotic responses, propose and begin implementing an alternative. And
that won't be through the IETF or similar.
Something I have learned about telcos and other vast business and govt
enterprises is they are willing to sit back, for decades if necessary,
and watch the pioneers break sod, find and grow the markets, take the
hits, fight range wars among themselves, etc.
And only then when what can be gained, and how, becomes clear they
move in with their vast capitalization and organizational skills.
"...now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made",
old union song.
--
-Barry Shein
Software Tool & Die | b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
