Re: radical solutions

[Steve Deering <deering@cisco.com>]

Sean,

Both NAT and GSE-if-it-works indeed make renumbering of sites easier,
but I don't see how easy renumbering really addresses the multihoming
problem.  Renumbering allows you to preserve/restore aggregation, e.g.,
when a site moves from one provider to another, but for the kind of site
multihoming that I thought was the concern of this WG, isn't the problem precisely that *de*-aggregation is what is required today to get good
multihomed service?  In the IPv4 Internet, as I understand it (and I
trust you to gently correct me if I'm wrong) the way a site gets
adequately multihomed today is by having a top-level, widely-advertised
prefix, or by getting a prefix from one provider and punching a hole
in that provider's aggregate by advertising it through other providers.
If those IPv4 sites today were easily renumbered, how would you use
that capability to reduce the growth and instability of the routing
system while continuing to offer adequate multihoming service?

Steve