Quoting RFC2860 [Re: I-D Action:draft-azinger-scalable-addressing-00.txt]

[Doug Barton]

On 9/27/2010 2:35 PM, Tony Li wrote:

> If it helps, my vision for the end state is pretty simple:
>
> - We use ILNP (or similar) for v6 to decouple locators from
> identifiers. - We simplify renumbering to make that tractable. - We
> aggregate aggressively to keep the table size down.
>
> As ILNP is going to take a long time to develop and deploy, we need
> to aggregate aggressively now to not create the v6 swamp and to buy
> us time in case ILNP is not a panacea.

All interesting stuff, and if you'd done it 10 years ago it might have a 
chance to be deployed today. But the fact is that we need widespread 
deployment of IPv6 _yesterday_, and jamming PA down operator's throats 
with the promise of something better tomorrow is not even in the 
neighborhood of a valid/useful strategy for a myriad of reasons, not the 
least of which is that the operators simply won't do it.

So I think I've repeated myself enough now for one day. Hopefully 
someone will come up with something new here sometime soon ...


Doug

-- 

	... and that's just a little bit of history repeating.
			-- Propellerheads

	Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
	a domain name makeover!    http://SupersetSolutions.com/