nanog mailing list archives
Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 18:47:46 -0800
And don't forget that you still have to change your phone number when you move a great enough distance. In IP we somehow feel it's important that there are no geographical constraint on address use at all. That's a shame, because even if we aggregate by contintent that would save up to four times in the number of entries in the routing table of any router.
Not necessarily true. I live in California. However, 703-842-5527 is a valid phone number for me. It even worked for me while I was in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico. I can take that number pretty much any where in the world, whether temporarily, or, even if I move there. Some exceptions would be the few countries that are attempting to block or make VOIP illegal, but, otherwise, I can pretty much take a VOIP phone number anywhere I like. Additionally, through FXP, you can take other numbers different places as well. However, I agree these are exceptions, not the general case. Nonetheless, the problem can be solved. I bet companies would be more willing to renumber when switching physical locations than they are to renumber when switching carriers at the same physical location. Owen
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI, (continued)
- Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI Daniel Senie (Nov 28)
- Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI John Kristoff (Nov 28)
- Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI Nils Ketelsen (Nov 29)
- Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI prefix [Re: who gets a /32) Owen DeLong (Nov 27)
- Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI prefix [Re: who gets a /32) Fred Baker (Nov 27)
- Re: BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI prefix [Re: who gets a /32) Owen DeLong (Nov 25)
- Re: large multi-site enterprises and PI prefix [Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]] Owen DeLong (Nov 22)
- Re: large multi-site enterprises and PI prefix [Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]] Chris Kuethe (Nov 22)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Owen DeLong (Nov 19)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Iljitsch van Beijnum (Nov 20)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Owen DeLong (Nov 20)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Michael . Dillon (Nov 22)
- Message not available
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Iljitsch van Beijnum (Nov 22)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 22)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Iljitsch van Beijnum (Nov 22)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Elmar K. Bins (Nov 23)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Iljitsch van Beijnum (Nov 30)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Alex Bligh (Nov 20)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Eric A. Hall (Nov 20)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Owen DeLong (Nov 20)