who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]

Mon Nov 29 15:58:52 UTC 2004

Paul Vixie wrote:
>>And please don't add any more layering violations.  It makes implementors
>>life painful and kills any architectual cleaniess in operating systems.
> 
> i have long wished for and sometimes needed a way to renumber a host w/o
> killing or restarting its active tcp flows.  this isn't a layering
> violation.  tcp should be able to know about endpoint-renumber events.

This is a layering violation and has endless security implications.

You can solve the renumber thingie by having all TCP connecting to/from
an official IP on the loopback interface.  Then the routing code could
do its work and route the packets through some some other or renumbered
interface.

Try to get your TCP automatic renumbering stuff implemented from spec by
five different people in five different codebases in a compatible way
within two month time... No way.

KISS KISS KISS KISS !!!

Why is the telephone (POTS/Mobile) so popular?  Easy answer: Even the
most stupid person on earth capable of correctly reading digits is able
to punch in a number.  As simple as it gets.

Have you ever worked in luser techsupport?  I did for the fun of it.
It's not pretty.  And that's why IPv6 is not going to fly.  It's broken
by design in so many places that it's impossible to explain it by phone
to Joe Average (with IQ100, I'm not even talking about the average US high
school dropout flipping burger in your favorite fast food chain).

-- 
Andre