RE: [narten-r/[email protected]: PI addressing in IPv6 advances in ARIN]
Mohacsi Janos <[email protected]> Fri, 14 Apr 2006 20:51:32 +0200 (CEST)
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.v6ops,gmane.org.apnic.global-v6 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006, James Jun wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Iljitsch van Beijnum [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 1:21 PM >> To: james-qgwYH1rQKO9Wk0Htik3J/[email protected] >> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [narten-r/[email protected]: PI addressing in IPv6 advances in ARIN] >> >> On 14-apr-2006, at 18:09, James Jun wrote: >> >>> How about you start operating a real network and feel the pain of your >>> enterprise customers who require usability? >> >> How about you do a "show ip bgp" and experience some pain of your own? >> >>> IPv6 is a failure >> >> IPv6 was created so we could continue to have an internet when we're >> out of IPv4 addresses. We're not out of IPv4 addresses yet. How can >> IPv6 be a failure at this point? >> >>> because of >>> ongoing FUD regarding so called 'routing table explosion' that even >>> IPv4 is >>> still susceptible to, >> >> We've managed to make a fairly big mess of IPv4 in 25 years. Yes, it >> still works but it's not pretty. IPv6 is supposed to last a lot >> longer than 25 years, so explosions of any kind are to be discouraged. > > Yes, discouraging customers from multihoming and delivering > reliability--that appears to be the common message from a good portion of > IPv6-advocacy groups. IPv6 is still IP, and not anything different than > IPv4 other than a color: more address space. If it is all of a sudden going > to require shim6 or similar, and discourage multihoming like the way it > happens today in IPv4, it certainly does not help. There is some solution to provide some form multihoming for IPv6: 3178 IPv6 Multihoming Support at Site Exit Routers. J. Hagino, H. Snyder. October 2001. (Format: TXT=24453 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL This solution is not very pretty, but you can keep the aggregation at Tier-1 and probably at Tier-2 porviders. Regards, Janos Mohacsi Network Engineer, Research Associate NIIF/HUNGARNET, HUNGARY Key 00F9AF98: 8645 1312 D249 471B DBAE 21A2 9F52 0D1F 00F9 AF98