Re: New (-02) version of IPv6 CPE Router draft is available for review

[Antonio Querubin <tony@lava.net>]

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:

> Basically what I envision is that for single PC deployment we'd run tunneling 
> (6to4) or equivalent, and "customer has a proper CPE router" would be native 
> IPv6. Single PC is ok to have tunneled as there will be no multicast etc in 
> that service. For routed multicast IPv6 you really really want to have a CPE 
> router (at least that is my opinion).

Why would a single PC be precluded from benefiting from multicast service 
if it's connection were tunneled?  While there may not be a direct benefit 
to the end-user, the alternative means a content provider would have to 
plan to support more unicast clients.  Even service providers benefit from 
reduced bandwidth in their core regardless of whether multicast customers 
at the edge are just single PCs.

Antonio Querubin
whois:  AQ7-ARIN