I-D Action:draft-azinger-scalable-addressing-00.txt

[Fred Baker]

On Sep 27, 2010, at 2:24 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> So this is one more strong argument for IPv6 PI in as many places as humanly possible.
> 
> Please note that I am not suggesting that this is a "fire and forget" solution, I'm aware that even in IPv6-topia there will still be renumbering due to organizational changes (e.g., mergers and acquisitions) but we really should be focusing on IPv6 PI as the answer, not as the problem.

So you would very strongly prefer a world in which router memory sizes are required to be effectively infinite. 

If you're willing to pay the opex and the capex, the cooling, the sticker price, and so on and so forth without murmur or complaint, I'm (well, a random router vendor of my acquaintance is) willing to sell it to you. My problem is that you may be the only person I can sell it to. Everyone else seems to be bothered by such issues.

One thing that seems to be lost in this discussion is that while many seem to think that the IETF (and therefore the vendors, as operators tell us they don't like to attend IETF meetings) isn't interested in solving operational business problems. What might in fact be true is that the IETF, due to lack of operational input, doesn't have clear guidance on what the operators consider to be the important problems. But reducing operational opex and capex is one thing that the IETF has had on radar for quite a while, along with making it more possible for new and interesting applications to be written that operate in a model other than client/server.