North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: IPv6 news
[email protected] wrote: setsRight, cause phone number portability is up and running for several There is a major difference between phone numbers and IP addresses which makes direct comparisons harder. Phone numbers are more like Domain names (+email addresses behind them) than IP addresses. People use phone numbers the same way they use domain names. They remember them and use them to access other people, or companies. I haven't seen many billboards with IP addresses on them lately. Nobody cares about the actual IP address. Only the computer does at the time of the DNS lookup. So an IP address is only used as underlying transport vehicle of data. For the enduser it doesn't have any direct significance. A phone number has significance to the end user and has a hybrid function as underlying routing element to varying degrees too. The entire problemset with IP address portability comes from two issues: Ease of ISP changes and redundant connectivity. The former could theoretically be solved with with better procedures and methods for host address assignment. However it still requires some labor intensive transition period and the IP addresses are much tangled with other things like DNS and so on. The second issue is IP architecture specific. The PSTN, due to its symmetric nature, doesn't have the redundancy problem to the same extent as the Internet. For the IP prefix however you have to participate in the global routing system to survive link losses. Without any shim6 or SCTP stuff that is. Again, phone numbers and their portability can and should not be compared with the IP address portability issues. They're very different animals. -- Andre
|