Re: [RRG] Consensus? 4 points so we can make progress

[jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)]

    > From: Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>

    > The question of how to enable end-user networks to easily choose
    > another provider
    > ...
    > In that time, the only solution which has been developed which meets
    > the needs of end-user networks is portable address space - PI space.

Within the current IPv4/6 architecture, crippled as they both are with only
one namespace, yes.

    > we need to settle on portable address space as the solution for
    > end-user networks' need to change to another provider
    > ...
    > Portability is a clear solution end-users are familiar with and
    > actually want - and the map-encap systems provide this portability
    > without the scaling problems 

As long as you make it clear that the solution is *NOT* "portable address
space", but rather "portable address space *along with* a map-encap system"
- the former being something that some people somehow seem to think is a
'solution'.

On its own, PI address space is about as useful a 'solution' as a
peanut-butter-and-jam sandwich is without the bread - i.e. a total
^%&^%*@&#%@$ useless mess.

	Noel

--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg