| 1 |
On Sun, Nov 14, 2021 at 09:15:36PM +0100, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 2021-11-11 11:59, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 3 |
> > We could: |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > - Open some part of the range between 500 and 1000. For example, |
| 6 |
> > 500..799, which would leave 200 IDs for dynamic allocation. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > - Open part of the range 60001..65533. Not sure if all software will be |
| 9 |
> > happy with that. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > - Admit that the concept of static allocation has failed, and return to |
| 12 |
> > dynamic allocation. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Only the third option is really possible. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
FWIW, I agree with this sentiment. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
1/ Static allocation does not really solve a problem. Not really not |
| 19 |
nowadays |
| 20 |
2/ We cant keep adding new IDs to a distribution as new software gets |
| 21 |
added - one side is unbounded. This is losing game. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Switching back to dynamic allocation seems to be the best option. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Eray |
Archives