|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]
On Mon, 2004-11-29 at 16:58 +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: > Paul Vixie wrote: > >>And please don't add any more layering violations. It makes implementors > >>life painful and kills any architectual cleaniess in operating systems. > > > > i have long wished for and sometimes needed a way to renumber a host w/o > > killing or restarting its active tcp flows. this isn't a layering > > violation. tcp should be able to know about endpoint-renumber events. > > This is a layering violation and has endless security implications. Full Ack. IMHO SCTP and HIP are the way to go at the moment. Both support both IPv4 and IPv6 btw. New technologies are required to solve old problems, which is not that odd now is it ? :) <SNIP> > Have you ever worked in luser techsupport? I did for the fun of it. Most people would refuse it :) > It's not pretty. And that's why IPv6 is not going to fly. It's broken > by design in so many places that it's impossible to explain it by phone > to Joe Average (with IQ100, I'm not even talking about the average US high > school dropout flipping burger in your favorite fast food chain). I am not flipping burgers, but did once work in a cheese factory (Gouda cheese anyone? :), I am wondering how you could keep this piggie from flying though. Could you elaborate or point me to a doc where you most likely already did? Greets, Jeroen Attachment:
signature.asc
|