[85611] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: shim6 (was Re: IPv6 news)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joe Abley)
Fri Oct 14 15:26:11 2005
In-Reply-To: <427B21E0A0353882EBEBA99F@imac-en0.delong.sj.ca.us>
Cc: David Conrad <david.conrad@nominum.com>,
"Christopher L.Morrow" <christopher.morrow@mci.com>,
NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
From: Joe Abley <jabley@isc.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 15:25:06 -0400
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 14-Oct-2005, at 15:16, Owen DeLong wrote:
> BTW, as I read it, SHIM6 requires not only modification to ALL
> nodes at the
> site,
> but, modification to ALL nodes to which the node needs reliable
> connectivity.
For one host with multiple, globally-unqiue addresses to talk
optimally to another similarly-equipped host, such that failures in
reachability of individual addresses should not cause sessions to
fail, both hosts would need to be shim6-capable.
> In other words, SHIM6 is not fully useful until it is fully
> ubiquitous in
> virtually all IPv6 stacks.
Which is not to say that there is no value in a non-ubiquitous
deployment -- rather, the value will grow as deployment proceeds.
Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFDUAYT/f+PWOTbRPIRAoZGAJ91IkqDyktDQjBPE0fXBhqXKYtDRwCfYMTq
GIy1KstwI70KJSMSop1uPSU=
=4tS8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
