[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: V6ops: IPv6 site multihoming best practices

To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: V6ops: IPv6 site multihoming best practices
From: Daniel Roesen <dr@cluenet.de>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 12:28:54 +0100
In-reply-to: <F1A1D21DA394814E824AC89F5A005BA30854697A@zcarhxm0.corp.nortel.com>
Mail-followup-to: v6ops@ops.ietf.org
References: <F1A1D21DA394814E824AC89F5A005BA30854697A@zcarhxm0.corp.nortel.com>
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 02:47:37PM -0500, Dwight Jamieson wrote:
> In the absence of mature protocol support for site multi-homing (shim6),

shim6 is not a site multihoming protocol, and that's the one of the
biggest problems of it. shim6 is (supposed to be) host multihoming.

> what are the best practice recommendations for an enterprise or service
> provider?

Use BGP for what it was designed. To connect autonomous systems in the
routing domain. There is no alternative yet, and none in sight.

Best regards,
Daniel

-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0

Follow-Ups:
- Re: V6ops: IPv6 site multihoming best practices
  - From: Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>

References:
- V6ops: IPv6 site multihoming best practices
  - From: "Dwight Jamieson" <djamies@nortel.com>

Prev by Date: Fwd: Gen-art review of draft-ietf-v6ops-vlan-usage-00.txt
Next by Date: Re: V6ops: IPv6 site multihoming best practices
Previous by thread: Re: V6ops: IPv6 site multihoming best practices
Next by thread: Re: V6ops: IPv6 site multihoming best practices
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread