North American Network Operators Group

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

Re: IPv6 news

  • From: Christopher L. Morrow
  • Date: Mon Oct 17 13:44:18 2005

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 [email protected] wrote:
> > I'm not sure I agree that the end state is 100% multihoming. I can
> > certainly agree that more multihoming is coming. Many more people are
> > pushing for multihoming today than in previous years, apparently telco
> > instability (financial not technical) is/has driven this :) (among other
> > things I'm sure)
> I agree that the end state is *NOT* 100% multihoming. It is
> too complex for most people and there is no business
> justification for it. But an awful lot of business customers
> will be able to justify multihoming. That is part and parcel
> of the "mission critical" Internet.

It'd be interesting to see how many 'providers' can't qualify for a /32
and will have multihomed in v6 and will thus have more than 1 /48 assigned
and thus more than 1 /64 per customer... Say someone like Covad or Rythyms
or perhaps even a cable-isp? In these instances each consumer will
actually be multihomed, yes? The complexity just landed on your
grandmama's doorstep.