Re: draft-savola-multi6-asn-pi-01.txt

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

On 20-feb-04, at 17:21, Pekka Savola wrote:

> > While limiting this to 15 bits worth of AS numbers solves some
> > problems, it also immediately removes much of the potential use from
> > this proposal, as this way there is still no solution for people who
> > want/need to multihome in IPv6 but don't have an AS number today.

> I've targeted this solution for the biggest corporations, for which
> (IMHO) multiple addresses are a non-starter.  Such corporations have
> AS numbers.  Such corporations don't crop up from nowhere.

The trouble with large corporations is that they typically have many 
offices. Now either all of those connect to the net individually, and 
then having a single AS and a single block of address space is of 
little use, or those offices are connected through a private network 
that also carries internet traffic, in which case they are their own 
ISP and they should qualify for an AS and address space like regular 
ISPs. (The 200 customers within 2 years requirement might be slightly 
problematic but there is push to lower this a bit anyway.)

> But if folks feel we should just allow everyone, one could just as
> well allow full 16 bits or even 32 bits.  That would just lead to the
> exhaustion of AS numbers, though -- and folks would be worse off than
> before, as also small enterprises would get AS numbers for the "easy
> multihoming ticket".

I agree that would be a bad idea.