Re: [homenet] renumbering the IETF

Mark Townsley <mark@townsley.net> Mon, 25 February 2013 22:18 UTC

Return-Path: <mark@townsley.net>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2527321E8123 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:18:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o6jF6WZgsqEW for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:17:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ee0-f45.google.com (mail-ee0-f45.google.com [74.125.83.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8840D21F90CE for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:17:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ee0-f45.google.com with SMTP id b57so1800750eek.32 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:17:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date :cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer :x-gm-message-state; bh=ve8C3v6MPesK5Yg/X6h3KjT49mvrAIh9AGRSYdMGZvM=; b=EK62TKbo7G4WJo5+WCDqiw0nj3FKuQTHmYgmdWWpDckQ2f37iohB2XvKnsVETi1Dp2 hhMj03fharpoog3HTcA2qu4na8PGJIS9Vv2EEoVXqbcn/R4AgM9VQ23CN63aWrMVKJPJ LdB6q1dxyE/xTO0FOPLsv8UdUWOkFW3ENNhjdDcv4u6vNZgEQyp76THmacasMKoU+Mo8 IIMbRF3A4NB7wiUFmaRrU4lm9PnBWA8PXkZlSRm5YitJZvXNP0QVV76pXewtjwMsiF9N mIcpKKvdIeZlkBeYXc/iCJimyeKw1/l0w1YsjRTyQ1v7WkN2Dj6T8KjBNDf+laXheqkg HavQ==
X-Received: by 10.14.207.73 with SMTP id m49mr43408342eeo.24.1361830676682; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:17:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:420:c0c1:8:5d9f:6665:5c42:8998? ([2001:420:c0c1:8:5d9f:6665:5c42:8998]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q42sm20493227eem.14.2013.02.25.14.17.52 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:17:52 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Mark Townsley <mark@townsley.net>
In-Reply-To: <51287D7A.60300@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:17:51 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <364CAA7D-4988-462D-B2AA-8729F228884C@townsley.net>
References: <CAKD1Yr19paD4W-Ls1xsunYCBmPKRNoWiO1XNbAaw2Jm5a7VhvA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAedzxr_LBMQsxE7QQzdibrwNXS4WuAEd7Wu4kOWiDxgZFkwWA@mail.gmail.com> <51287D7A.60300@gmail.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk6ickXg1rdnacg+v6A1g0OUHi/6P1bH/lR5OB/BJV3K77pke799tQ6glsjnJdJBUPJ0AV+
Cc: "homenet@ietf.org Group" <homenet@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [homenet] renumbering the IETF
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/homenet>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 22:18:00 -0000

On Feb 23, 2013, at 9:27 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> On 23/02/2013 05:53, Erik Kline wrote:
> ..
>> I wonder if we should ask the NOC about performing a renumbering
>> during the next IETF meeting.
>> 
>> Ideally, we should be able to perform one or two (or three)
>> renumberings in a week, glean the relevant operational experience, and
>> send a draft to v6ops shortly thereafter.
> 
> Great idea. I won't be in Orlando, but I am fairly sure there is nothing
> I would do there that cares about address persistency, apart from
> having to reconnect to jabber maybe. Conducting an RFC 4192 procedure
> on Tuesday night and a flash IPv6 renumbering during Thursday morning
> would be very interesting!

We might as well toss in some ULAs as well. 

- Mark

> 
> At least Skype will not be a problem during IPv6 renumbering.
> 
>    Brian