[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[GLOBAL-V6] Re: PI addressing in IPv6 advances in ARIN
Hi Craig,
See below, in-line.
Regards,
Jordi
> De: "Craig Huegen (chuegen)" <chuegen@cisco.com>
> Responder a: <owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
> Fecha: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 09:21:03 -0400
> Para: "Durand, Alain" <Alain_Durand@cable.comcast.com>, <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>,
> <ppml@arin.net>, <shim6@psg.com>
> Conversación: PI addressing in IPv6 advances in ARIN
> Asunto: RE: PI addressing in IPv6 advances in ARIN
>
> On Friday, April 14, 2006 6:54 AM, Alain Durand wrote:
>
>> A) if PI addresses are to be returned at some point in time,
>> they loose a dreat deal of their value. Folks like PI because
>> it shields them from renumbering.
>
> I'd like to clarify this a bit. As a large enterprise network operator,
> I'm less concerned about the need to renumber the network once than I am
> the need to renumber every time that I want to change a service
> provider. Don't take that the wrong way: renumbering is still a
> significant pain, but the real reason that enterprises haven't adopted
> PA space is that it represents a de-facto "lock-in" to the service
> providers they choose initially and they're faced with a network-wide
> renumber any time they drop or add a service provider.
>
> Most enterprise network operators that I have spoken to would be willing
> to renumber once in the future, in exchange for a reasonable way to get
> portable IPv6 space today.
Agree, that's my point, and even may be not needed if they could qualify to
become an LIR at that time in the future.
>
>> B) any address reclaim process might be lenghty and costly
>
> Maybe I'm being overly simplistic, but the policy can set a recovery
> timeframe in its allocation of PI space to end users and the market
> forces can drive the recovery based on the impact to the infrastructure.
> If only a few hundred prefixes are handed out, it might not be enough of
> a problem to force recovery.
>
> This may be a moot point for the ARIN discussion, though, as ARIN
> typically doesn't play all that much of an enforcer role. It can
> declare prefixes and prefix ranges as dead, but reachability is
> determined by the service providers.
Yes, that's the point, even if the space is not recovered immediately, it
may become not reacheable (so don't think nobody will ignore that, and they
will have 3 years to think about it ...).
>
>> C) given how long the shim6/multi homing has taken so far, it
>> seems hazardous to make any bet that in 3 years it will be
>> finish, implemented, adopted, deployed...
>
> I think that Jordi was referring to 3 years after the solution is
> declared "available" -- admittedly that's a tough milestone to set.
Yes, that was my point.
>
> Finally, I agree with all four other points you make; adoption of IPv6
> has been held up because the capabilities offered lack a critical
> requirement for enterprise networks (connectivity without de-facto
> service provider lock-in). The agreement to move forward with a policy
> is a very positive thing that enables IPv6 to work for large enterprises
> while the right solution is determined and rolled out.
>
> /cah
>
> ---
> Craig A. Huegen, IT Solutions Architect C i s c o S y s t e m s
> IT - Intelligent Network Solutions || ||
> Cisco Systems, Inc., 400 East Tasman Drive || ||
> San Jose, CA 95134, (408) 526-8104 |||| ||||
> email: chuegen@cisco.com CCIE #2100 ..:||||||:..:||||||:..
>
**********************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org
Barcelona 2005 Global IPv6 Summit
Slides available at:
http://www.ipv6-es.com
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.
