[lir-wg] Discussion about RIPE-261

Carlos,

> Carlos Morgado wrote:
> Again, I thought the point was making commercial IPv6
> multihoming work. This is all fine and dandy on 6bone but
> my clients will not pay me for a backup link that won't
> work when the primary provider goes down. No pay, no
> multihoming. No multihoming no commercial offering. No
> commercial offering, no happy fun end-to-end IPv6. Game
> set and match. (and yes, this is even more true for
> hosting than home users)

I could not agree more.

> No, I'm selling in technical good faith. I currently take steps
> to maximize the quality of the transit I sell considering the
> current IPv4 framework and current practices. In my opinion
> however with the /48 PA method I can't in good faith sell the
> same level of service.

Absolutely. Total ISP collapses do happen. All the time. When they do:

If you're and ISP, there is nothing worse than the customer getting on
your behind asking why the backup solution he has been paying you to
provide for over a year did not work. Not only you're going to loose the
customer but you're lucky if you don't get sued (in the US at least).

If you're the network manager for a customer, you look like an idiot in
front of senior management when they ask why the backup did not work.
What are you going to tell them? The redundancy solution that I bought
was crud in the first place?

Michel.