RE: An Internet IPv6 Transition Plan

["Chris L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow () verizonbusiness com>]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, Durand, Alain wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu] On
> > Behalf Of Chad Oleary
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 10:02 AM
> > To: nanog () merit edu
> > Subject: Re: An Internet IPv6 Transition Plan
> >
> > Personally, I see v6 as something that needed and desired by
> > the certain groups. However, when looking at the enterprise,
> > for example, better solutions are needed for things like
> > multi-homing, last I checked.
>
> It is just the same multi-homing as v4. No better for sure.

yup, and see below for a bug-a-boo

> > DNSSEC comes to mind, but that's a whole different story.
> > Add, since a host can have many preferred addresses, which to
> > use? How do deprecated addresses get withdrawn from DNS?
>
> This is a very good point. Having multiple addresses per interface
> introduce a lot a complexity that is not well understood today.
> However, nothing forces you there. If you do not run ULA, but
> run PA or PI space, you can very well manage only one v6 address
> per interface.

I think you mean 'PI' not 'PA or PI' because if you have PA and multihome
you'll have 2 addresses then have to play the 'which one is 'best' game...