[139466] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Implementations/suggestions for Multihoming IPv6 for DSL sites
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Job Snijders)
Sat Apr 9 07:32:08 2011
From: Job Snijders <job@instituut.net>
In-Reply-To: <4D9F470E.6040904@ac.upc.edu>
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 13:31:16 +0200
To: Lori Jakab <ljakab@ac.upc.edu>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Dear All,
On 8 Apr 2011, at 19:34, Lori Jakab wrote:
> On 04/08/2011 06:39 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> LISP can also be a good option. Comes with slightly more overhead in =
terms of
>> encapsulation/etc. than the GRE tunnels I use and has limited (if =
any) functionality
>> for IPv4 (which GRE supports nicely).
>=20
> Maybe you meant ILNP here? AFAIK, IPv4 and IPv6 are equal citizens for =
LISP.
Comparing GRE with LISP is like comparing /etc/hosts with the global DNS =
system. ;-)
I don't understand the comments about LISP and IPv4. IPv4 works just =
excellent with LISP. I have a IPv4 block at home which I multi-home over =
my IPv6-only DSL and IPv4-only FTTH line.=20
LISP is pretty address family agnostic: IPv4 over IPv4, IPv4 over IPv6, =
IPv6 over IPv4, IPv6 over IPv6, all work without problems.=20
Kind regards,
Job=
