On 15-Feb-12 08:42, Dave CROCKER wrote:
As I recall, there was essentially no experience with variable length
addresses -- and certainly no production experience -- then or even by
the early 90s, when essentially the same decision was made and for
essentially the same reason.[1]
It's not that variable length addressing is a bad idea; it's that it
didn't get the research work and specification detail it needed, for
introduction into what had become critical infrastructure. What I
recall during the IPng discussions of the early 90s was promotion of
the /concept/ of variable length addressing but without the
experiential base to provide assurance we knew how it would operate.
The problem with variable-length addressing that, in practice, one needs
to specify a maximum length. The result, therefore, is that you don't
have variable-length addresses at all but rather fixed-length addresses
with a shorthand encoding for unused bits.
S
--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf