>
> I would have thought that router renumbering should be no
> harder that host renumbering. Essentially all you are
> changing is the higher (/48 normally) prefix bits. All
> that is required is a method to distribute the set of
> prefixes in use with a set of tags (global, deprecated,
> ula, advertise in RA, etc.).
>
> Everything else should flow from that set. Firewall rules
> should be using that information as it really doesn't matter
> which global prefix a host uses to talk to the world. They
> are all essentially equal.
>
> I may we be showing my ignorance here but I don't believe
> that this really is a "to hard" job.
>
> Mark
This prompted a jabber discussion extracts of which follow.
<XXXXX> note that people who operate routers are usually all about control.
automatic renumbering is scary except maybe on the edge
<marka> There is no loss of control. It would still require a human to add a
prefix to the set of prefixes in use.
<XXXXX> somebody upstream from you renumbers. what happens?
<marka> With IPv6 I would expect that a both the new and old routes would be
published for a period. The old route would then be withdrawn. There is
plenty of addresses space. There is no need for instantious changes in
addresses.
<XXXXX> i was talking about control. your upstream adds new prefix, do you add
automatically or do you wait for human to approve it?
<XXXXX> simiarly for your upstream withdrawing, do you withdraw automatically
or ...
<marka> I would expect that there would be due notice give so that humans could
be involved.
Mark
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
