On 10/28/08 1:30 PM, Brian E Carpenter allegedly wrote: > On 2008-10-29 08:19, Scott Brim wrote: >> On 10/28/08 3:33 AM, Olivier Bonaventure allegedly wrote: >>> I think that we should take a completely different approach. >>> I believe that the networks, small, medium or large, that are able to >>> easily renumber their addresses will have a competitive advantage in the >>> long term compared to the networks that cannot renumber because they >>> will be more agile and will adapt more easily to changes in providers >>> and so on. >> Would making it easy to renumber be easier or harder than changing the >> Internet so that that didn't matter? > > I can't answer that question until I fully understand (a) what's > missing to make renumbering thinkable and (b) what infrastructure changes > would be needed to make renumbering unnecessary. Point (a) is why I think > the draft is worth writing, despite Olivier's point.
I see two ways to make renumbering unnecessary: (1) What Lixia calls "separation" (map-and-encap or ubiquitous translation) or (2) GSE. As for making renumbering thinkable, I believe the critical issue is: > On 2008-10-29 07:38, Scott Brim wrote: > >> Unfortunately for me you didn't produce a magic >> solution for the site policy change issues (Section 4.3.4). I think >> that's the critical issue area. > > Sorry, our magician's handbook didn't have a spell for that ;-) > > Brian swb _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
