ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Multihoming Issues

2002-09-03 20:07:47
Simon,

On 9/1/02 7:30 AM, "Simon Leinen" <simon(_at_)limmat(_dot_)switch(_dot_)ch> 
wrote:
- one prefix for each ISP in the world
- one prefix for each POP or campus in your network
- one prefix for each LAN in your POP or Campus
- additional prefixes that you decide to carry for your own reasons (eg,
policy)
My, that's a lot of prefixes.  I'm sure I'm missing something here.
Probably - note how the scope gets narrower as you go down to smaller
parts of the Internet.

Well, yeah, but if you want to gain full benefit of multi-homing, each of
these prefixes would need global visibility, no?

In the IPv4 Internet, you have all of the above, plus
- many prefixes assigned to most ISPs in the world after they used up
their first assignment
- many "campus" prefixes around the world that haven't been assigned
according to ISP topology (such as legacy Class B/Cs)
- many prefixes for "campuses" around the world that changed or added
ISPs but kept addresses from their original provider's range.

Looks like IPv6 won't have the first two of these.  We'll see what
will happen to the third category.

I would agree with the first of these.  I am skeptical regarding the second
-- having seen what sort of organizations became "ISPs" when CIDR
restrictions were imposed make me a bit cynical.  As for the third, I
suspect enforcement of renumbering implied by your statement guarantees
NATv6.

Rgds,
-drc



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>