sounds fun, though i can see unsecure networks in a link of secure networks allowing aggresive opportunist to comprimise a much larger system.

though using the virtualisation, 1 PC would have multiple IPs. which would [probably?] allow multiple High speed connections, through multiple networks.
Though I forsee a problem for noobs... why is the internet broken for this and not that?

although if there could be some ultimate 'bridge connections' option that automatically assigns a vitualised IP address to each process requesting one, without hogging to many memory resources trying to instance one process from one virtualised layer to another... it could be a pretty OK system... throw in a shell to allow advanced users to control applications using what goes through which IP and the connectivity to all of them (speed meterage would be nice to have around the place here) it would be an excellent system!

Though there would still be the issue that using that would be a superior hacking tool...

But REAL end users like things that 'just work' and if they need to change something themselves and they can. otherwise it seems more like a 'working bug' than a 'feature'.

This is a feature i would use to seperate my internet usage, gaming, IM and video calling. cause some of us like to be on Skype while using pidgin[an msn messenger alternative] while checking the nonsense your friends are telling you on wikipedia. then when thats boring alt-tabbing between facebook, myspace, and Unreal Tournement 3.

it would do microsoft a World Of Advantage to include an API that allows a relocated IP process to be broadcast to whats connected. Cause there would be nothing worse than some idiot hosting a game match server thinking its a little laggy, and switching it over and bam, connection to server lost. everybody rages... then games could listen for this broadcast pause the game while connecting to the new IP and people would be, less annoyed.
and with the use of AJAX increasing, im not sure how the background stuff works, but if the IP changes in a session then the server might be sending live data to a dead IP...

I've probably left too long a comment so i'll cut it off here.

tl;dr : It COULD be awesome, but it COULD fail if done wrong.

x

This would not be too hard to get around. If the virtual WiFi uses subnets of the assigned IP, that range could fall under the user. This will be really simple if it uses IPV6. I'm sure MS thought of some way to tie it all together.

Many folks use dynamic IP's over static. I would think the MAC tied to whatever IP, at whatever time frame would make for evidence in court, provided the prosecution can prove the person was the only one with access or motive. This is still kind of new, as to date most courts are interested as to what is on the hard drive (which includes cashed web addresses). Who knows what future effect the actual transmission leg of data will have. Soon your TV or refrigerator will have it's own IP (let you know when your beer is cold).

All they need to do is prove that during the time of the crime, the IP in question was linked to an account owned by person A. Person A is held liable by the courts. they SHOULD need to prove that it was really that person, but they are not being required to as of yet.

so far I love Win7, it runs great on my 2 year old laptop.