[Int-area] Starting some discussion on renumbering

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Thu, 11 November 2010 07:55 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: int-area@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 125923A68D6 for <int-area@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 23:55:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.584
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.584 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.015, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XXY0pnq1AQup for <int-area@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 23:55:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-gy0-f172.google.com (mail-gy0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CAB03A67B1 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 23:55:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by gyh20 with SMTP id 20so716175gyh.31 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 23:55:59 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=A5r8/5zNpBo98p/7WY1RoLk4p4CwE2iSv2tDgW6yEHg=; b=IeyFO+y37OU0tkKyChGykfxgNpXRVfyN/NgFyVs0fInhTsHC7UaLp2cX7m25Q9fxru jlJQC9SHgQhdxof1p5fQbyASgVRHqb1YDD7lKoElBXtQ5We11ro8kNfzbWEoHmJ0HpoY LXV6Pc2bqaL04xJbIEnBiudcKyJXimCIHCWHc=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=ON0fDGTHYpIZ1sFRlh/wFXHMQOz2dfXnpZgJH56NNDGhAOw41QHLdBuvvmcZqboXrM qNOoapbgFJWRm6lGXgr9ua9uRp2UMyr630WatbxOZkhE4zA3Ur2dRkA4ZLRpg95f2lhd oBEDuKCCAKb2Fi6ZxEykeuJZ9ZbW7NLX3ecYE=
Received: by 10.90.15.14 with SMTP id 14mr1038644ago.3.1289462158746; Wed, 10 Nov 2010 23:55:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [130.129.35.35] (dhcp-2323.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.35.35]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g8sm1302503yha.19.2010.11.10.23.55.56 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 10 Nov 2010 23:55:58 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4CDBA18B.6080307@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 20:55:55 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Internet Area Mailing List <int-area@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Int-area] Starting some discussion on renumbering
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/int-area>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 07:55:31 -0000

RFC 5887 (Renumbering still needs work) was published in May 2010.

I will assume that you've read it. It isn't a philosophical
document; it is meant to be technical.

So, the problem is that in any future scenario, site renumbering
will sometimes be needed, but remains very hard and impractical
for most sites. RFC 5887 justifies these statements.

What are we going to do about it?
- Is IPv4 site renumbering a lost cause?
- Should we focus entirely on IPv6? That is probably easier in several
  ways (new deployment for most sites, not constrained by a shortage
  of prefixes)
- We need a gap analysis. Is the gap analysis in RFC 5887 sufficient?
- In any case we should focus on what is doable, and put other problems
  on the "too hard" pile.

If you are interested in contributing to some work in this area,
please let me know (off-list is fine). If there is enough interest,
we can set up an ad hoc mailing list and decide on the next steps.
Remember that the cut-off for BOF requests for IETF 80 will be somewhere
round the end of January. Not much time...

-- 
Regards
   Brian Carpenter