Renumbering and the '96 Telecom Act

[Larry Honig]

Stephen Satchell wrote:

> This is more a telephony issue, and belongs in comp.dcom.telecom> 
> The existing telephone system converts the seven-digit number to an
> equipment address, and that equipment address is used by the switch to
> locate your pair.  This is why you can move in-town and get service 
> almost instantly, even though there was no physical re-wiring at the 
> frame.

I understand the differences between 7-digit phone numbers and IPv4
addresses. My question is a little deeper. I am NOT concerned about an
individual at the /24 end of the tree who changes providers, NICs, etc,
having to change an IP reference he/she may have inadvertently or
ignorantly published instead of a DNS name. I am asking about the
situation where an ISP decides to re-home or multi-home, and the implied
latency in propagating any IP changes related to this decision to the
world of DNS servers out there (some of which, IMHO *NEVER* pci up the
new reference ;-| ). I know (I think) that there is no present binding
authority in the '96 Act which mandates anything pertaining to this
*under present interpretations*. But...


> "Number portability" already exists on the Internet:  the DNS facility
> provides for this.  Indeed, users are discouraged from ever saving internet
> addresses anywhere they don't have to be saved so that number changes may
> occur relatively transparently.  It's too bad that there isn't a scheme for
> a system to "discover" where to find a name server by using broadcast
> requests initially so the poor user doesn't have to hard-code the name
> server address.  (I'm a dreamer.)
> 
> Remember that in telephony the identifier is a string of digits; on the
> Internet, the identifer is a name.
> 
> ---
> Stephen Satchell, {Motorola ISG, Satchell Evaluations}
> <http://www.accutek.com/~satchell> for contact and other info
> Opinions stated here are my PERSONAL opinions.