Depends on what namespace you're talking about changing names in, I
suspect.
For an identification namespace, renumbering is probably painful and
must be
rare, and have a high-value output for it to be feasible (e.g.
gaining access
to some new capability).
On the other hand, in a location namespace, any system _must_ support
renumbering at a 'reasonable' cost, and people _must be willing to
accept that
cost_ when they change their location (e.g. changing ISPs) - just like
everyone accepts that when you move to a new building, your mailing
address
changes, and you have to print all new stationery.
For LISP, in the average case it is assigning (or adding a secondary)
on the CE-PE interface of the 2 CPE routers and then update the
database mapping entry in each CPE. That's 3 commands in the 2 CPE
devices.
That is trivial and if performed everyday would hardly be any OpEx
cost. By no means does it need to be done everyday just pointing out
reassigning a locator address(es) to a site is pretty easy in the LISP
architecture.
Dino
The interesting question is whether people will accept having to
change their
location-name if we decide to rejigger the abstraction hierarchy...
Noel
--
to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
--
to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
