[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The renumbering problem [Re: [BEHAVE] Comments on the NAT66 draft]



On Nov 18, 2008, at 16:01, Gert Doering wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:22:14PM -0600, james woodyatt wrote:
I am so *so* tired of making excuses for bad code.  Just once, I'd
like to be able to say, "I see your coders thought it would be a good
idea to store IP addresses in a persistent store without any cache
coherency protocol, and now you can't renumber your network without
eating the time and expense of qualifying a radical new implementation
of your hugely business-critical software application.  You know
what?  That's your own fault.  Not ours.  p.s. I bet you'll read that
tech-note next time, right?"

OK, I bite.  What answer do you give to folks that need to renumber
things like site-to-site VPN endpoints, which affects lots of configuration
to be changed by *other* folks (their VPN peers)?

Please, help me understand why solving this problem requires storing IP addresses in persistent storage without a coherent caching protocol. I'm not seeing it-- probably because I'm not sure I understand the nature and scope of the problem very well.

For the sake of argument, I'll accept that reasonable people currently perceive it to be necessary. My hunch is that those folks should probably be using DNS-SD instead of the fragile cruftiness they're struggling against now. Maybe if I understood the problem better, I could suggest a more detailed alternative to their current solution.


--
james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>
member of technical staff, communications engineering