{ continuing Paul,Tim .... }
This draft simply documents the rationale and reasoning for 'address lending' instead of 'ownership', and why address portability is no longer a luxury that can be expected.
Hmmm. In actuality, there is nothing 'simple' about the concept of address ownership and address portability; and to label the issue 'simple' is to obfuscate a multidimensional issue. Anyone who as been either in the middle of the CIDR-renumbering debate or enjoying from the sidelines is fully aware that the issues are not just 'harmlessly forwarding meaningless documents', so let's 'just do it and forget about it'.... The fact remains that there are numerous other possibilities; such as fixing DNS and introducing NAT technology at the NAP level that allow aggregation at the provider level of the hierarchy and not at the user level. This imposes, however, the problem and solution on the providers and not the end-user; which BTW is the correct approach, and it is a drain of energy and resources to continue down this 'beat up the end user' path choosen by the WG in question. So we oscillate between 'complexity and simplicity'. The issues are complex and controversial on a full moon ; simple and clear another phase. This should clearly signal a red flag when protagonists of renumbering change position based on the audience and phase of the moon. Best Regards, Tim 'The Heretic' +------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Tim Bass | | | Principal Network Systems Engineer | "... the fates of men are bonded | | The Silk Road Group, Ltd. | one to the other by the cement | | | of wisdom." | | http://www.silkroad.com/ | Milan Kundera | | | | +------------------------------------------------------------------------+