Hi Steven, >> We recommend further work on automating renumbering because even with >> ILNP, the ability of a domain to change its locators at minimal cost >> is fundamentally necessary. No routing architecture will be able to >> scale without some form of abstraction, and domains that change their >> point of attachment must fundamentally be prepared to change their >> locators in line with this abstraction. > > I heartily agree that further work on automatic renumbering is needed. > However, ILNP could be deployed with ULAs and border locator translation > in the edge network, so it would not be strictly accurate to suggest > that automatic renumbering technology is a deployment dependency.
You are correct, it's not a requirement, but there is a large segment who have religious objections to border locator translation (i.e., NAT). Thus, some form of renumbering really is a requirement in the long run. Tony _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
