Eliot Lear wrote:
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.
I mean the obstacle against renumbering is "inertia" of existing
implementations, which will not be modified regardless of whatever
RFCs published later.
The only chance to have deployable renumbering mechanism was in
early stages of IPv6 development. It's too late now.
The next chance will be when yet another IPng will be developped.
Masataka Ohta
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf