North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
RE: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]
> -----Original Message----- > From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 12:41 PM > To: Iljitsch van Beijnum; Jeroen Massar > Cc: NANOG list > Subject: Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] > > > > > Now I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but having unaggregatable > > globally routable address space just doesn't scale and there are no > > routing tricks that can make it scale, whatever you put in > the IP version > > bits, so learn to love renumbering. > > > This is patently false. If it were true, then I would have > to renumber > every time I changed telephone companies. I don't, so, > obviously, there > is some solution to this problem. Now I'm not saying that I > necessarily > want to accept the overhead and risks of SS7 to solve this, but, there > are, obviously, routing tricks that can be used. Tricks reduce reliability and create unecessary dependancies. LNP was a regulatory issue post implementation of V4 so a trick was required.