[ih] IP addresses are not phone numbers, was Some Questions over IPv4 Ownership

[Larry Sheldon]

On 10/17/2010 8:38 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> John Levine wrote:
>> There's a couple of rather essential differences between routing phone
>> calls and routing IP packets. One is that phone numbers, unlike IP
>> addresses still have a great deal of geographic locality, since number
>> allocations are tied to geography, and number portability is limited
>> to within local areas. Regardless of portability, all numbers that
>> start with +33 are in France, and all numbers that start +1212 are in
>> New York City.
> Of course things change a bit as we worry about mobile IP. I sort of
> wonder when about how soon we'll get to the point where mobile devices
> outnumber fixed devices. Come to think about it, it's already the case
> for both my household and business.

Which is exactly the point I have been trying to raise--and had given up on.

We don't _know_ what will be driven by lawyers, marketers, and actual 
demand.

And we certainly don't know what technology will enable.  (Once upon a 
time telephone numbers were driven by switchboard multiples and then 
Stroweger switches with the concept of portability simply undefined).

We have several mobile devices (calling them "telephones" is as silly as 
talking about "dialing") that have one or more IP addresses.  So far we 
are surviving because they all use DHCP (and that might be the answer if 
coupled with a much faster DNS--I think the route will be via an 
advanced ARP).

I think (and will continue to think even if I am silenced) that saying 
anything (including the second law issues) is impossible guantees thqt 
you will be found to be in error someday.

I will be silent on the matter now, if I have to drop off the list.