North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Historical
Re: Address "portability"
- From: Avi Freedman
- Date: Sat Apr 06 08:50:29 1996
> At 12:32 PM 4/5/96 -0800, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
>
> >The California PUC has approved local phone competition within California,
> >with the requirement the phone number portability (between carriers) be
> >fully implemented as soon as possible. Making your phone number stay the
> >same no matter whether you're a PacBell or MFS or TCI customer is exactly
> >the same problem as making IP addresses portable... just wait until ISPs
> >are regulated, and they get the same mandate.
>
> Uhm, Cisco, you hear that?
I don't see it as being anything that Cisco can deal with. Probably the
IETF would be a better place...
Or, to put it another way, you can already advertise /32s using Ciscos.
If people listen to them, you have portable single IP addresses...
> Justin Newton * You have to change just to stay caught up.
> Internet Architect *
> Erol's Internet Services *
Avi
|
