Shim6 vs PI addressing
andy at nosignal.org
Mon Mar 6 08:11:13 UTC 2006
Roland Dobbins wrote:
> On Mar 3, 2006, at 10:50 AM, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> > OTOH, hosts go a lot longer between upgrades and generally don't have
> > professional admins. It'll be a long, long time (if ever) until shim6
> > is deployed widely enough for folks to literally bet their company on
> > host-based multihoming.
> This issue alone means that shim6 isn't viable. Besides the already-
> mentioned security and complexity issues, enterprise IT departments -
> i.e., the customers who need multihoming and cannot live without it -
> are not going to be amused when told that the tens and hundreds of
> thousands of desktops, laptops, PDAs, and other IP-enabled devices on
> their networks are now essentially routers, with multiple IP addresses
> and complex middleware required to simply access 'the Internet' . . .
We've been here before; we shift a lot of data in the content arena, and
our web-head loadbalancers, installed only a year ago, don't even
support ipv6 in the current software build.
More information about the NANOG