[ppml] 2005-1 and/or Multi6

[Andrew Dul]

>  
>  since one of the good arguments for 2005-1 is to allow provider
>  independent multi-homing, is there anyone out there who has been following
>  the multi6 working group in IETF who believes there will a timely
>  alternative forthcoming from that working group?
>  

I was at the last IETF meeting in Minneapolis and attended the multi6 working group meeting & shim6 BOF.  I honestly haven't been following this work closely but here are a few thoughts.  

The multi6 group has basically wrapped up their work at the Minneapolis meeting.  The "multi6" work will continue with the proposed solution in the "shim6" working group which had a BOF at the meeting to finalize the working group charter.  

Realistically from my perspective...  I don't see this protocol being standardized until 1-2 years from now.  Additionally since this is a host based implementation we probably won't see this largely deployed in a majority of IPv6 stacks for another 3-5 years.   I been trying to envision a shim6 world...and at this point I don't see the compelling reasons for doing multihoming this way.

>  do folks believe that PI /48s assigned under 2005-1, should it become
>  policy, would be willingly returned to ARIN by assignees once an
>  alternative workable multi6 implementation exists or would this policy
>  just create SWAMPv6?

I assume that those who received the address space would not willingly return it.   

Interestingly I had an exchange at the microphone during the IAB Plenary open session about this topic.  I pointed that this policy existing and is being considered in the ARIN region and if this policy was implemented the ideas about a very small v6 routing table may go away.  Someone responded with a comment like, that is just fine for the first 65k routes.

Andrew