|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from John Payne)
--- [email protected] wrote: > > Resounding YES - I specifically DON'T want > end-hosts > > to be able to make these decisions, but need to be > > able to multihome. > > When I see comments like this I wonder whether > people > understand what shim6 is all about. First of all, > these > aren't YOUR hosts. They belong to somebody else. If > you > are an access provider then these hosts belong to a > customer > that is paying you to carry packets. This customer > also > pays another ISP for the same service and the hosts > are making decisions about whether to use your > service > or your competitors. > > If you are a hosting provider, then these hosts, > owned > by a third party, are making decisions about whether > to > send you packets through one or another AS. > > Is there something inherently wrong with independent > organizations deciding where to send their packets? That's not the case I'm discussing - I'm talking about the multihomed enterprise. From an access provider point of view, Shim6 is no worse/better than the various TE-fu devices which end customers use - it makes predicting load a bit more difficult, but it's just bits to be passed. From an enterprise POV I want two or three decision points which I need to monitor and manage, not 10,000. > P.S. I don't believe that shim6 will ever succeed. Neither do I. 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
|