Subject: Re: Possible IAB workshop on routing and addressing participants?

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:16:49 +0200

Tony Li wrote:
>  
> 
> 
>>Also, IPv6 is currently using basically the same routing/addressing
>>architecture as IPv4 (modulo the proposed Multi6 stuff). Or 
>>is that your
>>point (that they are getting tired of the existing Ipv4/v6 routing
>>architecture)?
> 
> 
> 
> The latter.  The recent ARIN discussions plus the response to shim6 make
> it clear that ISPs have a concern about a tractable multihoming solution
> that simply cannot be supported in the current v6 routing architecture.
> They are clearly open to alternatives.

I think that the correct discussion is indeed about IP routing architecture
not about IP version numbers or address formats.

I don't want to restart the shim6 wars here, but one of the reasoms shim6
came out they way it did was precisely because the IP routing architecture
is the way it is. So if you don't like shim6, you pretty much have to
change the routing architecture.

     Brian

_______________________________________________
routing-discussion mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion

---

From: "Tony Li" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:22:14 -0700

Tony