> The rhetoric would have us believe that frequent renumbering with IPv6 > is seamless and effortless. I don't personally buy that, but there are > some assumptions there that perhaps should be challenged more directly > rather than in this oblique fashion. yesterday we had to change an AAAA RR and PTR RR because one of our servers got a new GigE interface to replace the old FastE. no part of ipv6 renumbers seamlessly, from where i sit. > If we accept the premise that frequent renumbering in IPv6 is not > seamless and is in fact painful and worth avoiding, then rather than > hiding the source of the pain behind a NAT perhaps we should try to > eliminate it: find a mechanism which facilitates pervasive multi-homing > with some stable view of layer-3 addressing from the layer above, > across re-homing events. we did. it was called A6. now we're apparently on to something else, like for example nothing, or for example pretending it's not a problem after all. -- Paul Vixie