[ppml] Address Space versus Routing Slots
Vince Fuller
vaf at cisco.com
Thu May 4 06:36:57 EDT 2006
- Previous message: [ppml] Address Space versus Routing Slots
- Next message: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2006-6: Bulk WHOIS agreement expiration clarification
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> > Vince Fuller wrote: > > (the best thing that could happen to a router vendor would be a > > return to the replace-the-core-every-2-or-3-years heyday of the 90s) > > Vince, you can't deny that preserving the status-quo on BGP is the best > way to insure that it will happen again. Carrying the "PI address" scheme of multihoming (i.e. assign a globally- visible prefix to anybody who wants to multihome) from IPv4 to ipv6 is the best way to ensure that it will happen again. And there are a lot more potential ipv6 prefixes than IPv4 prefixes. > As of touting ID/LOCs as the long-term solution, I have to question the > IETF motives on this one. As the political matters that have discarded > these solutions in the past are mostly unchanged, this sudden interest > in digging them out of the grave looks rather suspicious to me. The > shim6 team has been sent to a suicide mission, I wonder how many > protocol designers are ready to dust off their old ID/LOC stuff to get > slaughtered a second time. Since you have been around the IETF for such > a long time, maybe you have some insight to share about this for the > ARIN community? The IETF's position on this matter is that shim6 is the answer. My view, that an ID/LOC split is a fundamental requirement for scalable multi- homing, is considered heretical among the IETF leadership. Please don't confuse anything that I write with an IETF position because the two couldn't be more differeent. --Vince
- Previous message: [ppml] Address Space versus Routing Slots
- Next message: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2006-6: Bulk WHOIS agreement expiration clarification
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list