[rrg] Renumbering can never be secure, testable, reliable or routine - draft-carpenter-renum-needs-work

[Teco Boot]

I wouldn't say renumbering is always testable, is reliable and is secure.
But I think there are a large number of use cases that this is not a
problem.

Moreover, IMHO there are use cases where server farms needs very high
availability and this could be provided by using many PA addresses,
multi-homing and automatic renumbering with DNS Dynamic Update.

Teco.


> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: rrg-bounces at irtf.org [mailto:rrg-bounces at irtf.org] Namens Robin
> Whittle
> Verzonden: maandag 27 oktober 2008 6:21
> Aan: RRG
> CC: Randall Atkinson
> Onderwerp: [rrg] Renumbering can never be secure, testable, reliable or
> routine - draft-carpenter-renum-needs-work
> 
> Short version:   Renumbering of end-user networks can never be
>                  sufficiently testable, reliable or secure to
>                  be in any sense "routine".
> 
>                  Therefore, we cannot expect to have a routing
>                  scaling solution which depends on such
>                  "routine" renumbering be accepted by the vast
>                  majority of end-user network administrators -
>                  which is a requirement, since we need to get
>                  almost all such networks to adopt it.
<skip> 
> 
>  - Robin
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rrg mailing list
> rrg at irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg