[address-policy-wg] 2011-02 Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6 PI
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-02 Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6 PI
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Information Regarding AS paths
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
boggits
boggits at gmail.com
Sat Jul 2 12:28:05 CEST 2011
On 1 July 2011 17:14, Dan Luedtke <danrl.mailinglists at googlemail.com> wrote: > Dear Community, > I can't wait for this change to happen. As I discussed at IPv6 Kongress in > Frankfurt, Germany, there are more than a handful of people wanting that > change. For example, I have an IPv4 PI network and adopted early to IPv6 > using an IPv6 PA network. Okay, that sounds like you have a real reason for the change, can you please explain why (other than end users think they want/need it) ? > Never did, nor will I ever understand why > multihoming is required for an IPv6 PI network but not for an IPv4 PI > network. Given the choice I would quite willingly write a proposal IPv4 PI requires multihoming but that would be a return to deckchair arranging... J -- James Blessing 07989 039 476
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-02 Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6 PI
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Information Regarding AS paths
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]