[address-policy-wg] 2008-01 Moved to Review Phase (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)

>
>
> > I do not buy the argument that it should be rejected because this
> > would fill up the routing tables. If the Cogent/Telia ongoing
> > dispute is any indication, even the SOHO's will soon need to
> > multihome if they want global connectivity.
>
>
> Indeed.  I personally figure as people become more and more dependent
> on Internet connectivity (e.g., not just for communication/
> entertainment, but for system monitoring and control), multi-homing
> will become the norm rather than the exception.


Let's suppose I'm SOHO user.
Also let's suppose I have IPv6 only in form of /48 from one of tunnel
brokers(native IPv6 is not available to me).
And I want to multihome via IPv6(and think I have need for it). I think this
would be rather common situation in near future.

How I could do it now?
- Where I can get PI space? And how much it will cost?
- How I could get BGP sessions established with several ISPs?Is it possible
at all now?(for small SOHO user)
- What I could use as router(s)?Linux machine with Quagga(I'm SOHO user
after all so no specialized Cisco gear)?

How I can do it in 1-2 years from now?


Or I better forget this idea and just get several /48s from different
sources and let machines under my control to get several addresses and hope
that in case one of connections will be broken, application-level mechanisms
will retry and establish connection using different addresses?(in this case,
i think this will be blatant waste of /48s _and_ decreased reliability for
SOHO user)


-- 
--
Best Regards,
Dmitriy Kazimirov,
C++ Developer
of ISS Art, Ltd., Omsk, Russia
Web: http://www.issart.com
E-mail: dkazimirov at issart.com
Personal e-mail:dkazimirow at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20080321/9c49a8db/attachment.html>