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

Re: IPv6 news

  • From: Tony Li
  • Date: Sun Oct 16 02:37:44 2005 


I don't want to speak for Daniel, nor other operators really, but a

solution that doesn't allow an operator to traffic engineer
internally or

externally is just not workable. For the same reasons quoted in
your other

messages to me: "Increased reliance on the Internet"





There's nothing in any multi-prefix multihoming solution that
prevents an operator from internal or external traffic engineering.
There just isn't a single explicit prefix to manipulate. If, within
any given routing domain, you choose to carry a longer prefix and
manipulate it to whatever extent your vendor's BGP permits, you and
your consenting adult peers are free to do so. Do not, however,
expect the rest of us to carry your traffic engineering prefixes. We
are not interested.






agreed, but it doesn't seem that, until recently atleast, there was
much

operator participation. Hopefully that's changing for the better :)





Hopefully, that will reach a point where the operators show up and
participate at IETF, rather than the IETF coming to NANOG.



Tony