Re: Last Call: draft-carpenter-renum-needs-work (Renumbering still needs work) to Informational RFC

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

 



Masataka,

> The reality, instead, is that actual networks running IPv4 and IPv6
> ***CAN'T*** deal with renumbering, because of their inertia.
>   

While I obviously have sympathy for the sentiment, I think your
statement is too strong.  I believe it would be better to say that end
users have an economic incentive to avoid having to renumber, and most
are able to make use of RFC 1918 / ULAs and NAT with attendant
consequences to avoid the effort involved.

Still, I would argue strongly for inclusion of a fuller discussion about
technologies that obviate the need to renumber.

Eliot
_______________________________________________

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

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