[address-policy-wg] Status of 2011-02 Policy Proposal (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6)?

Hello all!

I don't believe that "making it complicated" will change anything in the 
demand and applications for PI address space. Home Users or small 
companies with just 1-8 IPv4 addresses resp. one /64 prefix don't need 
PI now and won't need it in the future. Whatever they need to change is 
done rather quickly. Big companies however, with several networks and 
several sites, do need PI.

We need PI address space for our infrastructure. No matter how 
complicated it will get - we already did it resp. will do everything 
necessary it in the future, to have and keep it.

The same for our major customers. When they need PI space they will do 
whatever is necessary to get it.

So as long as there is PI available, you need technological solutions to 
make it work. Of course I see the problems with growing routing tables. 
But customers do need PI so they will apply for PI and therefore the 
routing tables are growing. So you need a solution. And - sorry - it's 
no solution to just make it complicated/expensive and save the real 
solution for later.

To implement PI you need a provider. A provider is multihomed. So when 
the provider adds your v4/v6 PI space to his AS, it definitely is 
multihomed. You won't need your own AS to tell that to the world. :-)


More important: I don't believe that I am a great prophet by saying, 
that the demand of PI space in IPv6 is much greater than it ever was in 
IPv4!

Think of a regular company with several internal networks for DMZ, 
server-LAN, PC-LAN, VoIP LAN, VPN, development departments and with a 
couple of firewalls and routers between them. With IPv4 it's no big deal 
to change the provider. One just has to change the external IP 
address(es), make DNS adjustments and some tweeks in the firewalls of 
remote sites (subsidiaries) and within 0.5 to 4 hours the task is 
complete. Everything internal will stay the same with NAT-ed addresses.

But think of a provider change for such a setup with IPv6 on all 
networks! All routers, machines, servers and - that's the biggest issue 
- all firewalls are set up for the IPv6 addresses used. Changing them - 
with no major service disruption during working hours = on the weekend = 
dozens of hours at the most expensive time rates = several thousand 
Euros - will cost much much more, than to comply with the "artificially" 
complcated and unnecessary cost-expensive PI requirements today. So 
every bigger company WILL REQUEST v6 PI SPACE. At least after their 
first provider change... ;-)

Provider changes are not so rare as one might think! Many small 
providers offer good packages or features, that big providers 
won't/can't offer. The customer chooses the small provider and gets PA 
space. Some years later, the small provider will be absorbed by a bigger 
provider and the need for change is there. On average, we have one 
provider change per month with the customers we support.


So in my opinion: either if you remove the demand of being multihomed or 
not: you have to work out technical solutions for the many, many IPv6 
PIs that WILL be requested within the next years!

Making it complicated or expensive won't change that. It will only add 
unneccessary workload on all ends.


Yes I *DO* support the proposal to remove the multihomed requirement for 
IPv6 PI.

regards,
Thoma