Re: [shim6] IPv6 multihoming

[Vlad Ion <vlad.thoth@gmail.com>]

Mikael,

I mean, is starting in v6 with the same number routes as in v4 more of an issue than not switching to IPv6 fast enough and having to deal with a constant internet user base while people deploy more and more a 2layer NAT solution?

I'm asking because the internet deals ok with the existing number of v4 routes and having all new designated classes to ISPs subjected to the PA rule will only reduce the total number of routes or keep it the same if you include new multihoming customers.

Best regards,
Vlad

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Vlad Ion wrote:

Mikael,

Is it really such a bad thing to start off in IPv6 with the same number of routes as in IPv4 and slowly decrease it as providers implement IPv6 from PA classes and people announcing small blocks of IPv4? After all, the number of blocks announced by people doing multihoming will remain the same in ipv6 after a complete transition no matter what PI address space is used.

6rd is the natural next step in 6to4 development for ISP acceptance but it will not make enterprises and telco providers use IPv6 because it lacks a proper multi-homing support and using solutions like nat-pt generate a too large delay for delay sensitive services such as voice while using the existing v4 space translated to v6 format would provide an additional level of ease.

Best regards,
Vlad Ion

YES!

--
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se