|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Shim6 vs PI addressing
On Mar 3, 2006, at 10:50 AM, Stephen Sprunk wrote: >OTOH, hosts go a lot longer between upgrades and generally don't have professional admins. It'll be a long, long >time (if ever) until shim6 is deployed widely enough for folks to literally bet their company on host-based >multihoming. This issue alone means that shim6 isn't viable. Besides the already- mentioned security and complexity issues, enterprise IT departments - i.e., the customers who need multihoming and cannot live without it - are not going to be amused when told that the tens and hundreds of thousands of desktops, laptops, PDAs, and other IP-enabled devices on their networks are now essentially routers, with multiple IP addresses and complex middleware required to simply access 'the Internet' . . . they're starved for resources and talent like everyone else, and the network is -not- their business, simply a means to an end. It's all overhead, to them. Many customers have trouble simply supporting (and patching/ upgrading) basic OS and apps and IPv4. Expecting them to support something like shim6 is as unrealistic as expecting them to re- address at the drop of a hat due to changing business relationships with their SPs (see RFC 4192 for an exposition on the effort required to renumber, and discussion on the concept of network renumbering as a frequent procedure). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <[email protected]> // 408.527.6376 voice Everything has been said. But nobody listens. -- Roger Shattuck
|