About RIPE | Contact  | Search | Sitemap    
Homepage RIPE  
RIPE Community Mail Archives
search  
     
RIPE Navigation Ends
About RIPE Maillists
Maillists Archive
Global Lists
Non Active Lists
RIPE NCC Navigation Ends
Next Section
<<< Chronological >>> Author Index    Subject Index <<< Threads >>>

Re: Multihoming - Resilience or Independence

  • To:
  • From: Nurani Nimpuno < >
  • Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 17:34:10 +0200

Just a short comment from the RIR perspective.

The issues brought up in this discussion are questions that the RIPE NCC hostmasters are confronted with daily in the IP request handling.

Requesters who wish to multi-home (for one reason or the other) often ask the hostmasters for advise on whether to do it with PI address space or by having their upstream announcing a more specific route within a PA aggregate (which is then also separately announced through a second upstream).

Rather than the RIRs giving advise on these operational matters, we think it would be appropriate and helpful if these recommendations would come from the ISP community.

A few BCPs or guideline documents would be useful to point these requesters to.
Could this be an initiative for the routing-wg?

Kind regards,

Nurani Nimpuno
RIPE NCC


At 11/10/01 13:50 +0100, Niall Richard Murphy wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2001 at 09:16:41AM +0100, Peter Galbavy wrote:

Hi Peter,

> Trying to solve the problem of people not trusting ISPs by changing the
> technology to ensure that people *must* trust one ISP (IPv6 IMHO is just
> such a technology) is not a very customer friendly attitude. It does not
> work and will not work.

Not that I know anything, but in my opinion, you are inaccurate in two
respects here.

Firstly, IPv6 *technology* is not the issue. You can do everything that
you could do in IPv4 with IPv6, and this includes the current methodology for
multihoming. It also introduces another way of multihoming, which is akin
to taking PA space from multiple upstreams and initiating/receiving connections
according to some well defined algorithms.

I don't think there is any case to be made that the technology forces
a user to trust one ISP.

Secondly, however, it has been in my limited experience IPv6 *policy*
which has been perhaps more restrictive, inflexible and badly defined
than necessary, and in particular address allocation policy. Thankfully
this is well on the way to being changed, particularly after the developments
of the last RIPE meeting. If you are interested, you should contribute;
that way we all benefit from your insights.

Niall

--
Enigma Consulting Limited: Security, UNIX and telecommunications consultants.
Address: Floor 2, 45 Dawson Street, Dublin 2, Ireland.
http://www.enigma.ie/




  • Post To The List:
<<< Chronological >>> Author    Subject <<< Threads >>>
 

Next Section
     About RIPE | Site Map | LIR Portal | About the RIPE NCC | Contact | © RIPE Community. All rights reserved.
RIPE.NET Homepage LIR Portal RIPE Community