[85622] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: shim6 (was Re: IPv6 news)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Vixie)
Fri Oct 14 16:51:29 2005
To: nanog@merit.edu
From: Paul Vixie <vixie@vix.com>
Date: 14 Oct 2005 20:48:55 +0000
In-Reply-To: <F8230CDF-2A05-42C4-B2D1-4D3A5667A1A9@nominum.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
david.conrad@nominum.com (David Conrad) writes:
(shouldn't that be drc@iana.org now?)
> If my impression is correct, then my feeling is that something else
> is required. I am somewhat skeptical that shim6 will be implemented
> in any near term timeframe and it will take a very long time for
> existing v6 stacks to be upgraded to support shim6. What I suspect
> will be required is real _site_ multihoming. Something that will
> take existing v6 customer sites and allow them to be multi-homed
> without modification to each and every v6 stack within the site.
if all you've got is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. so, the
above problem statement looked like a dns issue to me, and to some other
folks, and thus was born A6. had ietf killed AAAA back when there were
effectively zero ipv6 hosts on the 'net, and paid the apparently-high A6
complexity penalty, we'd be talking about something else by now. as it
is, the shim6 complexity penalty is even higher, and i don't think we'll
ever get to stop talking about this problem.
--
Paul Vixie
