On Jun 20, 2007, at 3:11 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
I think there has been hype on both sides of this question. Routerrenumbering used to be VERY annoying. I've now published several timeson the subjectAny links to the papers?
A paper which in-my-non-humble-opinion covers a lot of the bases is http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4192.txt 4192 Procedures for Renumbering an IPv6 Network without a Flag Day. F.Baker, E. Lear, R. Droms. September 2005. (Format: TXT=52110 bytes)
(Updates RFC2072) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)
Actually, all renumbering is trivial, as long as nobody every
actually writes down an address and always uses a name. The problem
is - there are any number of places where people either are forced to
or in fact do choose to write down an address. As soon as that
happens, that is a place that has to be remembered and written again
when the address needs to be changed. Documentation and human memory
being what it is, every place where an address gets written down is a
place that will be re-discovered because something isn't working as
expected when a renumbering happens.
The ideal thing, of course, is that all configurations of all equipment are centrally managed from a common database, and all one has to do is change the database.
"the". It's an english word with a very interesting property. It is *singular*. As a result, it is very rarely the right word...
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
