Re: Renumbering

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Dave Cridland wrote:
> On Thu Sep 13 12:39:52 2007, Jeff McAdams wrote:
>> Mark Andrews wrote:
>> >     Except there really is no vendor lock anymore.  It is
>> >     possible to automate the entire renumbering process.  If
>> >     there are spots where it is not automated then they should
>> >     be found and fixed.
>>
>> Oh man, that's rich.  Do you actually believe that?

> Welcome to the IETF, where dreams are made reality.

> I particularly agree with Mark's final sentence, there - if renumbering
> is a problem, let's solve it.

> FWIW, I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of renumbering activity
> *is* automated, we've simply forgotten that it's already done. We've got
> autoconf, we've got DHCP, we have oodles of technology that's deployed
> already.

Yes, automated technologies handle 80% or 90% or even 99% if you've been
draconian in designing your provisioning systems.  Its that remnant that
makes the process infeasible, and that's not going to be fixed with
better protocol designs or technology implementations.
-- 
Jeff McAdams
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                                       -- Benjamin Franklin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]