North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: IPv6 news

  • From: John Payne
  • Date: Fri Oct 14 23:27:17 2005 
On Oct 14, 2005, at 10:57 AM, Joe Abley wrote:


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.
*IF* you're a big enough ISP. There are (a few) ISPs with few enough customers that they'd have to "exaggerate" plans to get the same level of multihoming that they do with their legacy IPv4 allocations...

Also, are people going to consider accepting longer than /32s from their direct peers? (not for global transit, just peering)... in this case I'm thinking about those networks who do inconsistant announcements at various NAPs for "in-country" and other reasons.