[address-policy-wg] Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6

Hay,


Am 07.05.2011 um 08:18 schrieb Mikael Abrahamsson:

> On Sat, 7 May 2011, Alex Le Heux wrote:
> 
>> In the BGP routing table the de-aggregation levels are much higher for PA allocations than for PI assignments though, 1:3.8 for PA allocations and 1:1.1 for PI assignments. This is the 21% number that Gert quotes.
> 
> Ok.
> 
> So the expectation from these numbers is that since v4 PI doesn't require multihoming, removing this from the v6 PI requirement wouldn't really mean that more people getting v6 PI than are currently doing v4 PI?
> 
> Is there anything else that might be different with v6 PI without multihoming compared to v4 PI that means current and historic v4 PI numbers might not be indicative of future v6 PI behaviour?

maybe the fact that IPv4 PI (+ASNs) were for free until very recently and now actually cost money AND - much worse - you have to hassle with
a stupid contract? (i still hate the NCC for the latter :-) but - that's another story).

So i expect actually LESS IPv6 PI deployment overall anyways for the foreseeable future.
...and then i hope we get rid of the PI vs. PA distinction as per Gert's presented suggestion during RIPE62.

-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind Regards

Sascha Lenz [SLZ-RIPE]
Senior System- & Network Architect