[ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Re: [lir-wg] IXP networks routing
Poul-Henning Kamp phk at phk.freebsd.dk
Tue Mar 4 16:14:57 CET 2003
In message <20030304161229.G15927 at Space.Net>, Gert Doering writes: >Hi, > >On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 04:07:58PM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> >It means re-thinking some established ways to do things - things that >> >have caused large problems in the past, and might not have been an overly >> >good idea to start with. >> >> Well, but those "established ways of doing things" may also happen >> to be exactly why we could deploy IPv4 in the first place, and their >> absense have provably hampered IPv6 deployment. > >Yes, of course we can stay on IPv4 with NAT and double-NAT and dynamic >IPs for customers and whatever kludges are necessary... > >Changing over to IPv6 *is* painful. I'm mainly talking about the lack of a feasible way for end-customers to get working multi-homing. This ties directly into the "PI" space question. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
[ lir-wg Archives ]