RE: Failover IPv6 with multiple PA prefixes (Was: IPv6 fc00::/7 -Unique local addresses)

["George Bonser" <gbonser () seven com>]

> Seems to me the options are:
>
> 1) PI, resulting in no renumbering costs, but RIR costs and routing
> table bloat
> 2) PA w/o ULA, resulting in full site renumbering cost, no routing
> table bloat
> 3) PA w/ ULA, resulting in externally visible-only renumbering cost,
no
> routing table bloat

In my particular case, IPv6 offers no advantage when it comes to
renumbering.  It is just exactly as difficult to renumber with v6 as it
is with v4.  I do understand that in a lot of cases where end nodes are
autoconfiguring based on RA it makes it easy but in many places that
really isn't an option.