nanog mailing list archives
Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]
From: Michael.Dillon () radianz com
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:31:36 +0000
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.
This isn't just a US phenomenon. Companies like http://www.telphin.com/numbers.php are selling this kind of number portability in other countries. And I remember some Australians were routing US phone numbers to their mobiles back in 1997. Clearly, telephone numbers are now being treated as names rather than addresses. The technical issues we should be concerned with are down at the address level. Could continental aggregation be a way of reducing the size of the so-called global routing table so that the table can accomodate a larger number of specifics within the continent? Alex Bligh raised the spectre of GRE tunnels to redirect traffic to the right location. Could this be done by simply readdressing the packets? Is this even relevant in a world that runs IPv4 and IPv6 over MPLS? After all MPLS is designed to swap and pop destination labels to route and reroute packets through the network. In a real-world network perhaps we should accept that some problems will be solved outside of IPv6. --Michael Dillon
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 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)