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

Re: Shim6 vs PI addressing

  • From: David Barak
  • Date: Thu Mar 02 01:53:22 2006
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=zA/hrKmPKsjy9G72cd84uE5rmpOlka1fC9l3/A2fsSd1mq3y5TzTxZlomCCSCqxZaduJUHnLUrpmhOfMGp70hUCbGrfeXSeWzS/muKuVC5snTM0MiLfpbT/sw8sAiKBm9iWZBs67Fl0w3FguNorXs4w6JngrKWEsIOOqN2csPX8= ;

--- Iljitsch van Beijnum <[email protected]> wrote:

> But the most important thing we should remember is
> that currently,  
> routing table growth is artificially limited by
> relatively strict  
> requirements for getting a /24 or larger. With IPv6
> this goes away,  
> and we don't know how many people will want to
> multihome then.

So why not approach Shim6 as something for basement
multihomers rather than enterprises?  Honestly, the
cost of the second connection is the limiting factor
in most decisions not to multihome today, not the
difficulty of getting BGP, an ASN, or a /24 from a
provider...

For your "I have a cablemodem AND a DSL" folks, Shim6
sounds like exactly what they need.  However, once you
start talking about enterprise-wide policies, etc,
Shim6 starts to look like a really heavy hammer.

-David

David Barak
Need Geek Rock?  Try The Franchise: 
http://www.listentothefranchise.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com