Brian, On 2010/07/31, at 6:16, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Hi, > > Sorry I was not in Maastricht and able to attend. > > Technically, it's very interesting, and is (as far as I am > concerned) the original plan for IPv6 multihoming, as we expected > ten years ago. > > But there's a problem. As far as I can tell from formal and > informal contacts with IT management in typical companies > and campuses, the idea of operating multiple prefixes in parallel, > although fundamental in IPv6 design, is highly unwelcome to such > managers. RFC 4192 is almost unknown, typical address management > software packages struggle to deal with even one IPv6 prefix, > and the aversion to renumbering when changing ISPs is enormous. > In fact there's an RFC about that too: RFC 5887. We know that > these site IT managers, and their ISPs, and therefore the RIRs, > are going for PI prefixes as a result of this situation. > > What I don't see is how we can make the multi-prefix approach > the preferred approach in the industry. Showing that it works > is not going to be enough. It has to be *easy*. I agree with you that the multi-prefix is really a change, just like or more than the introduction of IPv6 itself. In a broader sense, however, the multi-prefix is already there, in IPv4 and IPv6 dual-stack deployment scenario. For example, It causes a newly emerged needs for IPv4 and IPv6 address prioritization. And, we have invested much time on the multi-prefix way by introducing a lot of mechanisms, addresses, and deployment scenarios. But now, we have found several missing pieces on this way that needs to be filled in. If we decide not to go on this way, we have to go all the way back to the IPv4 way and go back further, in that we need to introduce IPv6-NAT and also IPv4-IPv6 NAT. It seems to me that this going back spoils what IPv6 is for. > On 2010-07-30 04:22, Arifumi Matsumoto wrote: >> All, >> >> at yesterday's bof, we had a lot of participants and good >> discussion. I'd like to say thank you here again. >> >> At the following site, you can find the presentation slides >> of yesterday the internet-drafts, and some related documents from BBF. >> Though the source code is not made public yet, we are thinking and >> trying to do so. If you have interests in it, please let us know. >> It helps a lot for publication. >> >> http://wiki.github.com/otroan/IETF-Non-Congruent-Multi-homing/ >> >> At the yesterday's discussion, I believe we've reached better >> understanding of the problems and some of the possible solutions. >> >> On 2010/07/28, at 17:52, Arifumi Matsumoto wrote: >> >>> All, >>> >>> the place and time is fixed for the bar-bof. >>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki/BarBofsIETF78 >>> >>> We welcome everyone to drop by. >>> >>> 20:00-21:30 >>> Multihoming with multiple prefixes without NAT66 : Implementation of >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-troan-multihoming-without-nat66. Live >>> demonstration with running codes >>> related drafts: >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-troan-multihoming-without-nat66 >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fujisaki-dhc-addr-select-opt >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dec-dhcpv6-route-option >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-savolainen-mif-dns-server-selection >>> location: 0.8 Rome >>> Contact: Jun-ya Kato >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >>> ipv6@ietf.org >>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >> ipv6@ietf.org >> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
