On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 18:54 +0200, Roger Jorgensen wrote: [mumbling about renumbering]
exactly! Let's use the time creatig the tools, create some standards and guidelines on HOWTO renumber instead of spending time reduing the same mistakes done in IPv4. We now have the change to save ourself from alot of trouble ~10-15years into the future...
Take a 200k+ node organisation, intra-dependencies with other companies and most of all external resources. Read: firewall rules at other parties, DNS servers hosted at other places and a lot lot more. There is no single tool which can cover that, that is a human issue as the other party will have to change things, if you can't reach them, you can't change. You don't want to wait for the other party to act. For many large organisations this will thus not work. Renumbering a large site is simply not easy. Indeed a small site (20 boxes max) with not too many external depencies can be done, but anything larger is a huge pain.
or the appropriate protocol enhancements are made so that local numbers become much less relevant to global routing? /Lea
This would be an even better solution, but... it'll take time....
This is why people are busy workin on SHIM6, HIP, SCTP and a number of other protocols. Still you will need a globally unique $something. IPv6 PI blocks can be used for this perfectly well. Just wait... before the routing tables explode (if they will) 16-bit ASN numbers run out any way and people will have to move to 32bit ASN's (funny isn't it that IPv4 is also 32bit, thus one will be addressing 32bits with 32bits...). The 32bit ASN's make sure that BGP won't go over the 2^32 routes, thus no problem there, as according to many the BGP tables can hold that (now lets see what convergence and flapping does ;) Greets, Jeroen