[ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Re: [lir-wg] IXP networks routing

Kurt;

> >> here are a number of people
> >> who will tell you that this won't scale and break a number of
> >> applications.
> >
> > Since I proposed it in April 2000, no one told me that this won't
> > scale.
> 
> That surprises me. Then again I wasn't aware of you draft until you 
> mailed it here. What WG do see this under? I will comment to multi6 
> anyway...

The draft is:

	draft-ohta-e2e-multihoming-*.txt

It was mailed to multi6 several times.

> >>> There already is running code of of 8+8, transport over it, such
> >>> as TCP, and applications over it, such as TCP multihomed telephony
> >>> with no address reselection latency, that there is not much work
> >>> remaning.
> >>
> >>> Never mention poor GSE. It is a poor idea useless for any purpose.
> >>>
> >> Uh, what is the difference between 8+8 and GSE?
> >
> > Current IPv6, in a sense, is 8+8 and was 10+6.
> 
> ???? you mean the IID being 8 and the rest the other 8? I don't agree...

You don't have to.

> > GSE is a poor variation of 8+8. GSE is poor because it is an attempt
> > to make ISP operation more complex (that is, less scalable), which
> > has been the tradition of telephone companies to maximize their
> > revenue.
> >
> I fail to see what GSE, 8+8 or anything have to do with telephone 
> companies.

You don't have to, either.

Just never mention GSE.

							Masataka Ohta