On the subject of how many entities should be multihomed. Any entitiy whose operations would be significantly impacted by the loss of their connectivity to the global internet. A personal example with names withheld to protect the guilty A distributor who took 85% of their orders over the internet the rest was phone and EDI the telcom coordinator got a 'great deal' on Internet service and LD from an unnamed vendor. Well we cut over our links and within a week our major customers had trouble reaching us due to the SP relying only on the public peering points to exchange traffic with other networks. At that point I set up BGP got an AS and reconnected our new provider and our old provider so that we had service from both SP's A 30 year old company almost went out of business due to being single-homed. Being dependent on a single SP is a "Bad Thing (tm)" At 04:02 AM 7/8/2005, Alexei Roudnev wrote:
Moreover, if you are not multihomned, you can be aggregated. If you became multihome - yes, you take a slot; how many entities in the world should be multihomed?
----- Original Message ----- From: "Kuhtz, Christian" <christian.kuhtz@bellsouth.com> To: "David Conrad" <david.conrad@nominum.com>; "Alexei Roudnev" <alex@relcom.net> Cc: "Mohacsi Janos" <mohacsi@niif.hu>; "Daniel Golding" <dgolding@burtongroup.com>; "Scott McGrath" <mcgrath@fas.harvard.edu>; <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 11:02 AM Subject: RE: OMB: IPv6 by June 2008
Alexei,
On Jul 7, 2005, at 9:58 AM, Alexei Roudnev wrote:
What's the problem with independent address space for every entity (company, family, enterprise) which wants it?
It doesn't scale. Regardless of Moore's law, there are some fundamental physical limits that constrain technology.
I would contend that is not true. What says that every device inside a company, family, enterprise etc has to be available and reachable by anyone on the planet in a bidirectional fashion as far as session initiation is concerned?
Once you add that bit of reality to it, the scaling requirement goes down substantially. Wouldn't you agree?
Trust me, I would like to just see us get it over with as far as IPv6 is concerned, provided we have a working, palatable IPv6 mh solution. But, man, I can't pass the red face test on a lot of these hypothesis.... :(
Thanks, Christian
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers. 163