ARIN Proposal

[Karl Denninger]

> On Wed, 22 Jan 1997, Stephen Satchell wrote:
>
> > There is another flaw in this analogy:  there is an announcement, a
> > parallel-operation period where *both* Area Codes are valid, then the final
> > cut-over.  I've been through this a couple of times with Chicago, New
> > England, and Bay Area clients.  (I'm also facing this with the idea to
> > split Nevada into two area codes -- I'm in Northern Nevada and Clark County
> > [Las Vegas/Henderson] run the state, so my area code is sure to change.)
> >
> > With IP numbers, you don't have any of those options, as I've mentioned in
> > what should have been a prior rock.
>
>         This is rapidly getting way off-topic. That being said:
>
>         Of course you do. I've assisted numerous organizations with
> renumbering and in many cases where this was necessary, we went through
> cut-over phases where both blocks were valid. In some cases, this
> cut-over phase lasted for over a year. On one case, it seems to be
> continuing indefinitely.
>
>         DS

There are many systems and other services where this is NOT SUPPORTED by the
operating system vendors and DOES NOT WORK.

Don't generalize the FreeBSD/BSDI/OpenBSD/Linux world to the rest of the
planet.  It doesn't apply.

Further, you generally CANNOT bind one task (ie: a web server) to more than
one address like this (well, ok, you can bind it to ALL addresses, but not a
given subset).  Multiple processes operating off the same data work in SOME,
but not all, cases.

--
--
Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
http://www.mcs.net/~karl     | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
                             | 99 Analog numbers, 77 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| Email to "info at mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/
Fax:   [+1 312 248-9865]     | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal