Re: draft-kurtis-multihoming-longprefix comments

[Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>]

> Major comments:
>
>  1) Seems to give wrong impression about the effectiveness of this
> mechanism.  I believe (I'm collecting and analyzing some data too) 
> that a
> significant portion of multihomers do it because they want to obtain
> operator independence.  They usually don't have PI addresses, but what 
> I'd
> call "PA sold off as PI" or "PA advertised as PI". (Esp 5.3)
>
> There must be an applicability section or statement early on what this
> tries to accomplish.
Well, what I am looking for is

a) Any idea of why people are doing this. We are again back to the 
problem that we should first understand what we are trying to solve 
before we start posting solutions. From the discussion in Atlanta, this 
was just a suggestion to at least buy us some time.

>  2) If we really need to go down with longer prefixes approach, I'd 
> really
> want to restrict hem to peerings (and even smaller upstreams) only, 
> _NOT_
> DMZ.
Well, you could use one of the mechanisms suggested in ptomine to limit 
this.


Best regards,

- kurtis -