Re: draft-kurtis-multihoming-longprefix comments

[Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>]

On Fri, 10 Jan 2003, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:

> There is two sides to this

> a) Why do people multihome?
> b) Why do they want PI-like address space?

> What worries me is if people are doing a to get to b. I don't want to
> see these two being the same.

People multihome because it makes their connection to the net more
reliable, because it is sometimes cheaper and because you get better
performance if interconnection between ISPs isn't very good.

People want PI space because that way changing ISPs is trivial. And even
for people who don't want to multihome this is very important: if your
ISP goes belly up, you want to be able to connect to a new one very
quickly.

In theory, renumbering isn't a big problem: you only need to change a
DHCP configuration or some prefix advertisements. In practice, it is a
nightmare because IP addresses show up in way too many places, often to
enforce access restrictions. Getting rid of this is probably the hardest
part in any multiple-address solution.

So either we have portable addresses or we create a better way to do
access restrictions.












>
> > The only possible solution *in the architecture as it stands* is to
> > use DNS
> > names, if people need a location-independent host identifier.
>
> There is AFAIK no limit on this group to use the architecure as it
> stands. And I don't believe DNS is the only solution.
>
>
> - kurtis -
>
>

-- 
http://shameless-book-plug.bgpexpert.com/'BGP'-by-Iljitsch-van-Beijnum/