On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Andy Davidson<andy@nosignal.org> wrote:
On 04/03/2010 19:30, William Herrin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Joel Jaeggli<joelja@bogus.com> wrote:
handling the v6 table is not currently hard (~2600 prefixes) while long
term the temptation to do TE is roughly that same in v6 as in v4, the
prospect of having a bunch of non-aggregatable direct assignments should
be much lower...
Because we expect far fewer end users to multihome tomorrow than do today?
The opposite, but a clean slate means multihomed networks with many v4
prefixes may be able to be a multihomed network with just one v6 prefix.
Assuming RIR policy allows multi-homers to be allocated/assigned
enough v6 to grow appreciably without having to go back to the RIR. As
a multi-homed end-user, I don't currently find that to be the case.
It will be the case for many mid-sized businesses.
