I think that Brian has summarized this renumbering avoidance as "desirable but nothing to be depended on"
-éric On 17/08/15 08:57, "homenet on behalf of Toerless Eckert (eckert)" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 09:41:24AM +0300, Markus Stenberg wrote: >> Just like in some other old workplace, cough, ???if it does not work >>without IPsec, do not expect it to work with it???. > >Should i even try to understand that reference ? ;-) > >> I do not expect homenet stuff to do much better here, unless we want to >>make it crazily complicated. >> >> Normal, graceful renumberings are a part of IPv6 and should work >>equally well given single 7084 router and homenet router network. IPv4 >>???renumbering??? will be bit less graceful no matter what, I am afraid, >>but that???s outside the architecture RFC mandate anyway and done just >>as a public service. > >I don't know why Juliusz called stable storage bad. I think it's great. >Where would i be without stable storage for my routers software, policy >configuration, passwords, logs and the like. Why should it be bad to >memorize addressing ? I think it's mandatory for IPv4, and for IPv6, >i'd love to have some option to either re-number when i click - to weed >out bad apps/OS problems - or a switch for persistency of addresses >(one to improve reality, one to live with it). > >Cheers > Toerless > >_______________________________________________ >homenet mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
