[ppml] Soliciting comments: IPv4 to IPv6 fast migration

[Antonio Querubin]

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007, Kevin Kargel wrote:

> LNP made telephone routing more complicated, increased call failure, and
> increased hardware cost.  All this was done to accommodate a feature
> that was mandated to the telco's by the government.  This increased
> complexity and hardware comes at a cost.  You can safely assume the
> telco's are not going to absorb that added cost out of the goodness of
> their hearts.  The added cost will be passed on to the provider.
>
> The same thing will happen in the TCP world if "local IP portability" is
> forced and aggrability is abandoned.

I suspect this isn't as big an issue for IP as it is for telephone 
numbers.  Consumers really drove the demand for LNP and if you ignore 
SIP-style addressing for making voice calls, there really was no viable 
alternative for telephone numbers at the time.  Telephone users weild 
significantly more political clout numerically than network administrators 
who don't want to go through the pain of renumbering.  IP addresses simply 
don't reach down into the consciousness of the average user enough for 
them to care because they're accustomed to dealing with email addresses or 
domain names, not IP addresses.

Antonio Querubin
whois:  AQ7-ARIN