North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: IPv6 news

  • From: Joe Abley
  • Date: Fri Oct 14 10:59:40 2005

On 14-Oct-2005, at 10:13, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:

Yep, there is no multihoming, but effectively, except for the BGP tricks
that are currently being played in IPv4 there is nothing in IPv4 either.
But one won't need to upgrade a Tier 1's hardware to support shim6, as
shim6 is:
1) not baked
2) not helpful for transit as's
3) not a reality
Not baked is absolutely correct, and not a reality follows readily from that, as viewed by an operator.

I'm interested in (2), though. Shim6 is not intended to be a solution for transit ASes. If you're an ISP, then you can get PI address space and multi-home in the normal way with BGP.

The big gap in the multi-homing story for v6 is for end sites, since those are specifically excluded by all the RIRs' policies on PI addressing right now. Shim6 is intended to be a solution for end sites.

Are you suggesting that something else is required for ISPs above and beyond announcing PI space with BGP, or that shim6 (once baked and real) would present a threat to ISPs?