Re: Call for action vs. lost opportunity (Was: Re: Renumbering)

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

 




On Sep 14, 2007, at 2:22 AM, David Conrad wrote:

And I would suggest by ignoring history we are doomed to repeat it. I am not engaging in "I told you so" because I didn't -- you'll note I used "we". I am merely pointing out that we're either at or very quickly approaching a crossroads and the choices we have are constrained by the reality of the Internet today and past decisions we, the IETF, have made.

Well, yes. But I do find myself wondering what tool one might really want to use here and how it differs from what we do in IPv4.

Correct me if I am wrong (but not here - let's have that discussion on v6ops). To my way of thinking, the process described in RFC 4192 can't really be automated start to finish, and it is nonetheless pretty much the right process. Parts of it can be, such as once an operator decides he wants to add a new prefix to every router interface in his network, the database he uses to manage such things can ssh to each router and add the prefixes, and similarly when he decides to later remove the old, the database can do that. But the big problem in renumbering isn't "getting the addresses assigned". It is "finding and fixing all the places where that address was used in numeric form to ensure that they now have the right new value". Since human screwup behavior isn't automated, fixing human screwups is difficult to automate.

So we can have tools that help with the major steps, but a lot of the verification process can only be done by observation.

Recriminations and rants aren't going to make that much different.

What would be Really Nice would be to in some way ensure that applications never saw IP addresses at all - they *only* worked on names, and maintained no knowledge in the application of what address was used. To my small mind, forcing a new DNS lookup in the event of a TCP session failure and restart would be a good thing. The authors of RFC 4778 would take exception - they want to be able to log into the right place when everything is in flames. Apart from that, though, managing addresses through names would go a *long* way toward making renumbering easier. We already have many of those capabilities, though. We have to as an industry consistently use them that way.

_______________________________________________

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]