[ppml] Multihome Pro Con Document
Correct. Thank you
From: Jason Schiller [mailto:schiller at uu.net]
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 8:38 PM
To: Michel Py
Cc: Azinger, Marla; ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [ppml] Multihome Pro Con Document
It might be useful to explain why each of these solutions is not
deployable for one or more types of multi-homing users. Adding this text
may help to let people know how far off we are from a deployable solution.
I'd suggest you provide some text to Marla on a solution by solution
basis. Depending on the text, she can either include this info either
under "cons", or "Questions to consider", or under a new section
I suspect this is exactly what Marla was trying to do in a non-negative
constructive sort of way.
Jason Schiller (703)886.6648
Senior Internet Network Engineer fax:(703)886.0512
Public IP Global Network Engineering schiller at uu.net
UUNET / Verizon jason.schiller at verizonbusiness.com
The good news about having an email address that is twice as long is that
it increases traffic on the Internet.
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, Michel Py wrote:
> Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 16:36:42 -0700
> From: Michel Py <michel at arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us>
> To: "Azinger, Marla" <marla.azinger at frontiercorp.com>, ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [ppml] Multihome Pro Con Document
> Hi Marla,
> While this document does a decent job at describing solutions, it does
> not address the #1 reason why no solution is deployed a decade after we
> started working on finding one: palatability of the solution to the end
> users. In other words: what are the realistic chances of a given
> solution to be successfully deployed in the real world.
> The main issue with IPv6 multihoming is not the pros and cons of
> solutions, but their deployability. Failure to understand this is why,
> 10 years after, we still are discussing the pros and cons of solutions.
> PPML mailing list
> PPML at arin.net