[ppml] IPv6>>32

[bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com]

> > 
> > On May 10, 2005, at 3:32 AM, Michael.Dillon at radianz.com wrote:
> > > Some people will switch providers on a daily basis.
> > 
> > I am somewhat skeptical that people will switch providers as you
> > suggest when it takes end-user intervention to implement that
> > switch.  Renumbering remains a non-trivial exercise.  Connections
> > break.  Firewall rules change.  Network management objects have to be
> > updated.  Etc. Until renumbering is addressed (no pun intended), I
> > suspect the scenarios of *ANs switching providers rapidly will remain
> > a fantasy.
> 
> You appear to be thinking in terms of existing fixed networks and the
> cumbersome tools that vendors provide for managing those. It is not hard to
> imagine a personal area and/or vehicle network where the handset/router
> changes providers between available short range and long range radios over
> fairly short time periods. Renumbering is not a complex task. The tools that
> allow it to happen are currently cumbersome, but that does not mean they
> can't be automated. In fact it is not all that hard to imagine a fully
> automated set top that switches service between power line, cable, dsl,
> fiber, metro-wireless, or satellite based on which service had the lowest
> rates today. 

	moving their BGP peering links, DNS servers, SNMP traps,
	syslog collectors et.al...  peice of cake.  No real problems
	with any of these things.. right?  any issues w/ radius or
	other accounting logs?  didn't think so.
	
	yes, i can imagine a settop box that
	is able to swap out the highorder bits btwn several providers
	based on some metric suite.  i can also imagine the grief i would
	go through trying to explain that the 96 low-order bits that seem
	to be mine attached to an invoice - for service i did not receive.
	(seems that some perp had changed his low-order bits to match mine
	and then freq-hopped btwn service providers - with MY addresses!)

	rapid, painless renumbering will only be effective when/if
	there is a clear, clean separation btwn the topology locator
	and the node identifier.  HIP might work.  the bastardized construct
	that is IPv6 today will -NEVER- do transparent, easy, painless
	 renumbering.  Of course, YMMV and i might have a tiny bias here.

--bill (ex chair of the PIER w/g)