ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: getting IPv6 space without ARIN (Re: PAT )

2000-08-17 18:30:02
[I suspect this should probably go over to ipng or something, so this'll
be my last post]

You can't simply banish multihoming by fiat

Wouldn't think of it (always thought the arguments that multi-homing to
different providers wasn't necessary were unrealistic).

But I thought the official solution to multi-homing in v6 was an
(provider allocated) address per interface.  I will admit I haven't been
following this too closely.  Which document(s) did I miss?

The "TLA allocation registries" then should have no prohibition
on allocating prefixes which the service providers may or may not route
in the future.  

If you look at the allocation policies, I think you'll find that this is
the case.

Of course, using this approach, there should be no swamp under v4
either.  

Without a registry allocating unique addresses, we'll end
up with NAT all over again.

I would argue that without transparent from the end user's perspective
(not easy, transparent) renumbering you will never get away from NAT.

Tnx,
-drc