[ppml] Multihome Pro Con Document

[Davis, Terry L]

Randy

I agree completely on the residential issues.

But I'm not sure that the enterprises will advertise the same prefix in
DC, St Louis, Seattle, and LA.  And Moscow, Delhi, London.  Same reason,
te.

Take care
Terry

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy at psg.com]
> Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 7:26 AM
> To: Howard, W. Lee
> Cc: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [ppml] Multihome Pro Con Document
> 
> > End-user networks may require some means of switching from two
> > types of residential access, but may be generally assumed to have
> > no more than two simultaneous links, a single prefix, and no need
> > for traffic engineering.
> 
> why the assumption of only two and why the assumption of no te?
> i want voip out the left and quake out the right, for example.
> 
> > Enterprise networks need multihoming primarily for reliability,
> > but may also need some level of best-path selection, and may need
> > some degree of load distribution.  In IPv6, they will generally
> > have no more than two prefixes.
> 
> wait a sec!  i was told that we would not have the prefix explosion
> in v6 because we could give each site enough space so that it would
> only need to announce one prefix into the global routing state.
> 
> randy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML mailing list
> PPML at arin.net
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml