On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, Durand, Alain wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Chad Oleary Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 10:02 AM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: An Internet IPv6 Transition Plan
Personally, I see v6 as something that needed and desired by the certain groups. However, when looking at the enterprise, for example, better solutions are needed for things like multi-homing, last I checked.
It is just the same multi-homing as v4. No better for sure.
yup, and see below for a bug-a-boo
DNSSEC comes to mind, but that's a whole different story. Add, since a host can have many preferred addresses, which to use? How do deprecated addresses get withdrawn from DNS?
This is a very good point. Having multiple addresses per interface introduce a lot a complexity that is not well understood today. However, nothing forces you there. If you do not run ULA, but run PA or PI space, you can very well manage only one v6 address per interface.
I think you mean 'PI' not 'PA or PI' because if you have PA and multihome you'll have 2 addresses then have to play the 'which one is 'best' game...