Eliot Lear wrote:
Most of us -- MOST OF US -- have a clue. That you refuse to
it and respect those opinions is unfortunate.
Where is the document that shows what requirements need to be solved?
How would you correlate the stated need from the network manager for:
Stable addresses, both during ISP changes, and for intermittently
Why is it that stable addresses are so necessary?
Could it be because renumbering is painful?
Could that be one source of our ills?
Fix the underlying problem. Making renumbering easy.
If we don't do that, IPv6 is no better than Ipv4.
While I agree that we need to get at the underlying problem, handwaving
that easy renumbering will solve it is not helpful. In many cases the
requirement for stable addresses is being handed to the enterprise
network manager by unreasonable Sr. VPs who want to lower their internal
development cost & don't care about anything more than getting their
product out the door. Claiming that easy renumbering will solve that
internal business issue is just an IETF fantasy.