On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 11:05:22PM +0300, Jari Arkko wrote:
David,
We had an opportunity to fix that, but we blew it.
I think everyone agrees that having that flexibility
(ease of renumbering, no routing explosion in the
core etc) would be good.
But I would suggest that instead of playing the
"what if" or "I told you so" games, we collectively
focus on solving the problem. And getting it solved
means having a solution that actually works, has all
the little details (like what the security is etc) worked
out, fits with the incentives that the various players
have, and so on.
And we have a place for that work to happen in the
IRTF. There's a lot of promising work, but they
don't have a final solution yet; the details do matter
(and I suspect that they also mattered back at the
time IPv6 was being designed).
Jari
the old PIER wg had some useful ideas on the
scope fo the renumbering problem... if the
IRTF wants to revisit the problem that might
be a good place to start.
--bill
Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and
certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf