[ppml] 2005-1 status

[Owen DeLong]

On Jan 25, 2006, at 7:12 AM, Scott Leibrand wrote:

> On 01/25/06 at 7:40am -0600, Bill Darte <billd at cait.wustl.edu> wrote:
>
>> Of course.  Routing protocols are no more an ARIN issue than  
>> addressing
>> policy is an IETF issue. What I ask is...is it likely in the next 15
>> years to have a scalable routing protocol that makes the issue of PI
>> addressing of end-sites mute?  25 years?
>
> Who knows.  I've only been *alive* for 25 years, so I can't exactly
> predict that far into the future.  :)
>
> In all seriousness, I think PI space will be needed as long as the
> Internet runs BGP.  I have no idea what the drivers will be for moving
> beyond BGP, or when that might happen.  It's certainly far enough  
> away to
> have little or no bearing on the current policy discussions, though.
>
Except to the extent that there seems to be substantial consensus around
the idea that we should not create a driver for such a change.

I'm not sure I agree with that consensus, but, I think it exists in  
the community
at large.

>> Are there no other compelling reasons to need...desire... PI space?
>
> There may be other reasons related to relative routability of  
> different
> classes of IP space, but since ARIN expressly disclaims  
> responsibility for
> routability, I'm not sure how germane that is to making policy.   
> And in
> any case, I'm pretty sure NSP IPv6 BGP filtering policies will change
> significantly as everyone transitions from IPv4 to IPv6.
>
Until shim6 is real, multihoming is a real and legitimate need for PI.
I think shim6 is years away from being real, and, perhaps as little
as a decade away from being meaningful as a multihoming solution.

Owen