To:
Tony Hain <alh-ietf@tndh.net>
CC:
Robert Elz <kre@brandenburg.cs.mu.OZ.AU>, ngtrans@sunroof.eng.sun.com, namedroppers@ops.ietf.org, ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com, dnsop@cafax.se
From:
Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date:
Wed, 8 Aug 2001 23:30:43 +0859 ()
In-Reply-To:
<IEEOIFENFHDKFJFILDAHOELCCOAA.alh-ietf@tndh.net> from Tony Hainat "Aug 8, 2001 02:53:20 pm"
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: (ngtrans) Joint DNSEXT & NGTRANS summary
Tony; > > The only real problems are that with IPv4 we > > allowed the IP addresses to be configured everywhere ... > > If *configuration* were the 'only' problem it might be possible > to fix renumbering. The fact that applications expect they need > to know about the addresses in use will compound the problem > such that it will be very difficult if not impossible to make > renumbering completely transparent. Are you talking about ancient whois implementation? > I have no doubt we can find > a way to completely automate renumbering, but I seriously doubt > that we can 'fix' all of the application developers, and their=20 > products. Given this state, the end user will be exposed to > renumbering events. We either accept this and find a way to > scale routing without renumbering, or accept that NAT will > persist. Or, are you saying an NAT server can be detached from old ISP and attached to new ISP keeping the existing connections? Masataka Ohta PS With end-to-end multihoming, it is possible that application/transport program periodically check DNS to be smoothly renumbered.