Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]

[Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis () kurtis pp se>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


(catching up)

On 2004-11-22, at 18.52, Paul Vixie wrote:

> > > none of those three things is acceptable, not even as a compromise.
> >
> > The current solution I see for this is still IPv6. Except that one 
> > moves
> > the complete 'Independence' problem a layer higher. Enter:
> >
> > HIP: Host Identity Protocol:
> > http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/hip-charter.html
>
> this level of complexity seems a little high for anything to be 
> universal.
> (let me put it this way: A6/DNAME was shot down because of complexity, 
> and
> it was simpler than this.)

I am not convinced A6/DNAME would have solved all problems, not even 
all of the ones you pointed out.

- - kurtis -

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.1

iQA/AwUBQancTKarNKXTPFCVEQJ22QCfQ32v6oWBDVe9t2CVRT1vuc0BtggAoMbz
xpInNhcRVCGIMdkm5GX40ozj
=s5iV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----