[ppml] IPv6>>32
Michael.Dillon at radianz.com
Michael.Dillon at radianz.com
Tue May 10 06:17:41 EDT 2005
- Previous message: [ppml] IPv6>>32
- Next message: [ppml] IPv6>>32
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> I'm not sure that we should be in the business of built in obsolescence, We are not talking about built-in obsolescence. Rather we are talking about TRUST. Do we trust the IP engineers and RIR members of the future to recognize when and if IPv6 addressing needs to be revised? Do we trust them to do the right thing? If we do, then the best course of action is to leave well-enough alone. We have shown that it is likely to work just find for many decades. In particular, Geoff Huston has shown that if there is a future need for a revised IPv6 addressing plan, there are lots of spare addresses to use for this great renumbering. It is premature to be changing the addressing scheme when we have so little experience with IPv6. In that repsect we simply are not qualified to make these decisions. We should leave this decision to the experts. And who are those experts? The engineers of the future who will have 10-20 years of IPv6 operational experience are the experts I am referring to. --Michael Dillon
- Previous message: [ppml] IPv6>>32
- Next message: [ppml] IPv6>>32
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list