[89245] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Shim6 vs PI addressing
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andy Davidson)
Mon Mar 6 03:11:47 2006
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 08:11:13 +0000
From: Andy Davidson <andy@nosignal.org>
To: Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@cisco.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <786EBCE6-2BC9-4A77-8527-5177AB2B9987@cisco.com>
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: andy@nosignal.org
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Roland Dobbins wrote:
> On Mar 3, 2006, at 10:50 AM, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> > OTOH, hosts go a lot longer between upgrades and generally don't have
> > professional admins. It'll be a long, long time (if ever) until shim6
> > is deployed widely enough for folks to literally bet their company on
> > host-based multihoming.
> This issue alone means that shim6 isn't viable. Besides the already-
> mentioned security and complexity issues, enterprise IT departments -
> i.e., the customers who need multihoming and cannot live without it -
> are not going to be amused when told that the tens and hundreds of
> thousands of desktops, laptops, PDAs, and other IP-enabled devices on
> their networks are now essentially routers, with multiple IP addresses
> and complex middleware required to simply access 'the Internet' . . .
We've been here before; we shift a lot of data in the content arena, and
our web-head loadbalancers, installed only a year ago, don't even
support ipv6 in the current software build.
-a
