[address-policy-wg] IPv6 access to K-root
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 access to K-root
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 access to K-root
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Elmar K. Bins
elmi at 4ever.de
Mon Feb 28 17:14:56 CET 2005
jeroen at unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) wrote: > >Like said - it should have been underway already... > > As you so 'badly' want one, write something up and describe exactly what > you want, now you are just running up to the walls. Maybe my english didn't make that clear: I have seen this proposal, and I've just been told it hadn't been submitted yet. > BGP is only 'limited' in the number of updates that can be handled. The > likelyhood that more entries cause more updates will rise, next to that, > we only have max ~60k ASN's anyway at this moment, thus even if every > ASN would announce 1 IPv6 prefix it would stop at max ~60k entries... The Sup720++ CAM tables are limited to 256K v4 entries, unless I've gotten that wrong and the boards also limit BGP paths (which I don't believe. > >... as long as your transit providers know each other, agree not to > >filter, and you're happy with the fallback connectivity through the > >block owner. We're in a lucky position, not everybody is. > > You can also ask the other transit upstream to announce your /48 for > you. Mind you, I prefer to advertise myself, and, as discussed, am in the lucky position that my transit ISPs are reasonable. > Nevertheless, for real end-sites, like my house, most websites and > other 'endsites', if you want to multihome, have some patience shim6 to > be done or as Gert said, make a really neat proposal. See above. I consider this "house" an end site that unfortunately needs real multihoming nonetheless. But I can live with a /48 PA multihoming solution. It works well. I do need a solution for the anycast thing and shim6 will not do it. > Multihoming on IP is silly in most cases anyway, because most of the > time the cable-path is the same, thus one single silly fiber cut would > take you out anyhow... We have taken great care that exactly this is untrue. > and if you can pay for multiple differentiated > uplinks you are most likely also big enough to claim you (will) have 200 > endsites. End sites are no ISPs. Try as I might, I will not have different companies as my customers. There seem to be different kinds of end-sites, maybe we are one type and you're the other. ;-) Elmar. -- "Begehe nur nicht den Fehler, Meinung durch Sachverstand zu substituieren." (PLemken, <bu6o7e$e6v0p$2 at ID-31.news.uni-berlin.de>) --------------------------------------------------------------[ ELMI-RIPE ]---
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 access to K-root
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 access to K-root
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]