Re: OMB: IPv6 by June 2008

[Daniel Roesen <dr () cluenet de>]

On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 12:52:35AM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> > Multihomed end sites usually get away with receiving only default route
> > or some partial routes from their upstreams. So technically you can
> > BGP multihome with Cisco 1600 or even smaller easily (dunno where BGP
> > support is starting to become available).
>
> Technically yes, practically no.  At least not for the purposes people
> normally want to multihome.

I cannot confirm this observation from my experience supporting a number
of customers with their multihoming setups that I've either designed
myself or supported as part of "managed internet access" solutions.

I _did_ see several badly designed setups though that had full tables
(and associated hardware overkill) but didn't need it. Consequence:
wasted money, worse convergence times and routers falling over because
of RAM depletion and fragmentation over time.


Regards,
Daniel

-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr () cluenet de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0