This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it lessdestructive
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it lessdestructive
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it lessdestructive
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nils Ketelsen
nils at druecke.strg-alt-entf.org
Mon Apr 24 08:36:52 CEST 2006
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 06:54:58PM +0200, Roger Jorgensen wrote: > > IPv6 has made it possible to renumber the network almost automatically. > > it seems possible to make that change without a "flag day" and an outage. > > however, the tools are mostly *NOT* there for similarly easy renumbering > > of router ACLs and firewall configs and DNS, so as the size of the network > > increases, large organizations are saying there is still a significant > > cost to renumbering (at this time...). one can only hope that appropriate > > tools will be developed to make full renumbering reasonably painless. > exactly! Let's use the time creatig the tools, create some standards and > guidelines on HOWTO renumber instead of spending time reduing the same > mistakes done in IPv4. We now have the change to save ourself from alot of > trouble ~10-15years into the future... Your wording implies PI was a mistake in IPv4. I think it is one of the reasons for its success, not a mistake. Nils
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it lessdestructive
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it lessdestructive
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]