[ppml] Soliciting comments: IPv4 to IPv6 fast migration

[William Herrin]

On 7/27/07, Robert Bonomi <bonomi at mail.r-bonomi.com> wrote:
> > That's a great point Keith. And here's the nasty part: because they
> > waited until the issue was forced, they had to make it fully PI,
> > individual number by individual number. They lost the option to use
> > some sort of sensible grouping strategy.
>
> When provider assigments to end users are individual numbers, there
> is _NO_OTHER_ way to implement 'portability'.

Robert,

DID assignments aren't all individual numbers, Robert. The folks I
work for have hundreds of direct inward dial numbers (i.e. phone
numbers) assigned to their set of four PRIs. Had the telcos started
early they could have grouped those numbers and required all of them
to be moved or none.

Instead...

> It was the -little- users -- equivalent to a /30 or maybe a /29 -- that
> drove the telco PI situation.

And with the government's weight behind them, they forced the process
down the telco's throats so that now telcos have to implement
number-by-number portability not just for the little guys but for the
big accounts too.


There's a lesson there for anyone who would overreach in their efforts
to keep the DFZ small.


Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William D. Herrin                  herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr.                        Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004