nanog mailing list archives
Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 09:34:16 -0500
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 7:41 AM, TJ <trejrco () gmail com> wrote:
It doesn't solve the problem of an enterprise with more than one location/network-interconnect... we can go around this rose bush again and again and again, but honestly, deployment of v6 happens for real when there is a significant business reason to deploy it, and when the real concernsofenterprises today are actually addressed.Indeed, and the IETF's answer for multi-homing (SHIM6) is a non-starter for
to be fair, there are 3 options for multihoming today in v6 (three sanctioned by the IETF, not ordered in any order, not including discussion about goodness/badness/oh-god-no-ness of these) 1) multiple addresses on each device, one per provider 2) shim-6 3) HIP (still in development, as I recall) These don't address how the network is used today, nor customer requirements for enterprises nor operational concerns about running a network.
the majority of those interested in doing so. Enter PI space, now available from (most of) your local RIR(s).
sure, you can get PI /48's or up to something >= /40's... but, you are expected to not deaggregate these, and I suspect there will be issues when you attempt to do so with reachability.
Yes, also enter DFZ growth ...
hurrah! :( -Chris
Current thread:
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Roger Marquis (Feb 04)
- RE: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space TJ (Feb 04)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Mark Andrews (Feb 04)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Martin Hannigan (Feb 04)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Christopher Morrow (Feb 04)
- RE: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space TJ (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Marshall Eubanks (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Christopher Morrow (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Joe Abley (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Jack Bates (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Iljitsch van Beijnum (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Owen DeLong (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Roger Marquis (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Owen DeLong (Feb 05)