shim6 @ NANOG
jabley at isc.org
Sun Mar 5 22:51:06 UTC 2006
On 5-Mar-2006, at 17:03, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> All this time, energy, and thought spent on shim6 would have been
> better spent on a scalable IDR solution. Luckily, we still have
> another decade or so to come up with something.
So the answer to the lack of a routing solution to multi-homing in v6
is to proceed as if we do have one, and hope that one appears at some
point in the future before the lack of one causes too much pain?
Very little time has been spent on shim6 so far. Far more time before
that was spent on multi6, which considered many different approaches
Note that I'm not saying that the IETF process in general (and the
multi6/shim6 process in particular) have been without dysfunction;
however, I think your characterisation that "there has never been any
significant work done on replacing CIDR with something that scales
better" is a little misleading.
More information about the NANOG