Re: [RRG] Comments on draft-lewis-lisp-interworking

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>]

On 2008-03-25 16:30, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> Thus spake "Tony Li" <tony.li@tony.li>
>> |Er, right, which I guess is why Plan A for IPv6 has always been
>> |pure PA, and use multiple prefixes on a site that has multiple
>> |ISPs.
>>
>> That plan went south awhile ago, when the RIR's decided to hand out PI
>> instead.  Oops.
> 
> That plan was dead the day it was conceived; few in the IETF realized it
> at the time because they never bothered to ask end-site operators what
> they thought, but if they had it would have been clear how unacceptable
> it was.

Well, I believe I was still an end-site operator at the time
(1995/96), and I didn't see then and don't see now what the *big*
problem is. There are certainly operational implications, but so
there are in the PI model, and if we don't solve those here, I think
you will discover that Plan A isn't actually dead at all. However,
let's not waste RRG time on this. (Therefore, I won't respond to
Ran Atkinson's very apposite message here.)

    Brian

--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg