[85619] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: shim6 (was Re: IPv6 news)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Roesen)
Fri Oct 14 16:32:07 2005
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:31:36 +0200
From: Daniel Roesen <dr@cluenet.de>
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Mail-Followup-To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <435010E6.5060708@globalstar.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 01:11:18PM -0700, Crist Clark wrote:
> Actually, doing multihoming and getting PI space are orthogonal in
> shim6 last I knew. That is, you could get address space from your N
> providers and have one of the providers, say Provider X, to be the
> ULID for the end points. Should Provider X's link(s) go down, shim6
> will ensure it all still works (which is, after all, the whole point).
But when the contract with this supplier is terminated, I have to
renumber the whole network. Excellent.
> Getting PI space is really an administrative and economic issue. It is
> not a technical requirement of shim6.
That's the problem. Ignorance regarding economical problems. We don't
have technical problems, we have economical ones (if at all).
Best regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
