Re: Newbie Question about addressing impacts

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 11-aug-04, at 18:13, Fleischman, Eric wrote:
> 
> > Newbie question: Assuming a multihomed environment with N ISPs 
> > supporting a corporate network of 2K+ routers and 200K+ computers. Is 
> > multi6 proposing that the interfaces of the routers and computers each 
> > have N different global addresses, one set for each of the N ISPs?
> 
> At this time, multi6 isn't exactly proposing anything. But yes, pretty 
> much everything that's under discussion right now assumes this.

I think pretty much everyone has silently made an assumption that it
would be unreasonable to expect that to happen -- especially if all
the hosts would need to be globally addressable (and not e.g. with
unique local addresses, with global addresses only distributed to the
proxy servers or whatever).

The really big folks WILL get their own /32 allocation in some way or
the other, I'd guess.  I'm not so opposed to the idea.. just the fact
that if that becomes a common practice, it'll be difficult to draw the
line in RIR policies..

This is probably the case for very big enterprises who have a limited
number of ISPs and Internet connection points, possibly in the same
region (i.e.: all the traffic goes through 2-3 ISPs).

It's slightly different if you have 100 branch offices in 100
different countries: then addressing each country's offices from each
country's ISP provider address space might still be feasible.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings