IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Two prefixes [draft-ietf-v6ops-icp-guidance WGLC]

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Wed, 08 August 2012 12:12 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EE3521F8600 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 05:12:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.485
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.485 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.206, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP=1.908, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2eDlOoBj6rml for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 05:12:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ey0-f172.google.com (mail-ey0-f172.google.com [209.85.215.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E7F521F85F7 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 05:12:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by eaai11 with SMTP id i11so209524eaa.31 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 05:12:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=TYx3eJhPwbJCbpO5U1KoF+MSLtTyHjSN4ZO5MED5pkc=; b=zLzb1Zj8B+SnVCh8UjkI4A20LMZv9eS2tLbFH/qzHXWHD6os4BY9RakmiqC9+rJi0B bjY/ZyPz0edD1e3WZDGcNiFr9ibPN0zNtBGnNytsGch5nM3Mi0RkxrKNGjAYmB/ROvMv 6A9MQ4lCah1PHalXn1IVFLO+SMMn2JR7QpVtaVwqvBN425dTPFM3mwb8BDL8fVmolEL1 agF+B3g7asu0NGQTn1L8LfA7ONHxuqlTwTvrE7NZkF0CIr7iwVQaMOaNuMP2BHzCNzcL pRghG9wWdfMbgwRfbFSiQVQJ4ZUfzusUjlHnZZITpMDpbEv2z9MhnQelyCH2uWZU/OuO qQNg==
Received: by 10.14.210.197 with SMTP id u45mr22086770eeo.42.1344427939755; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 05:12:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.65] (host-2-102-217-169.as13285.net. [2.102.217.169]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h42sm64204346eem.5.2012.08.08.05.12.18 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 08 Aug 2012 05:12:18 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <502257A7.7080208@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 13:12:23 +0100
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
References: <5F52A5BB-36F7-4CF9-9639-960C65ADFD4E@cisco.com> <CAD6AjGRMQ8o5fVHeWaOanKYomqJ0jArXS-zXm4qQdqacPS0QbA@mail.gmail.com> <5020DEC0.1090601@gmail.com> <1344332397.93146.YahooMailNeo@web32504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <CAD6AjGSAE3=rcSo2=96qfiY_41Kq8r5cSgC0N1-fbF+msMF0bg@mail.gmail.com> <50211B63.3020203@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr1_bADT7cwX9QccRickCYHxqiaDu89Qz7fhbsyZZS6r-Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr1_bADT7cwX9QccRickCYHxqiaDu89Qz7fhbsyZZS6r-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: V6ops Chairs <v6ops-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, Ron Bonica <ron@bonica.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Two prefixes [draft-ietf-v6ops-icp-guidance WGLC]
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 12:12:21 -0000

On 08/08/2012 06:33, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Brian E Carpenter <
> brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I think that's unfair and kind of ignores
>> draft-v6ops-multihoming-without-ipv6nat
>>
>> It works today. There are known difficulties with address selection
>> and with ingress filtering, of course. And it's a bit more fiddly to
>> configure routing and DNS for IT crews used to the old way of doing things.
>> But it really isn't unknown territory.
>>
> 
> If I were a content provider, I would think twice before choosing an
> architecture that breaks TCP connections when upstreams go down.

Yes, and that certainly deserves a warning in the text.

My concern here, as I've already hinted, is publishing advice that is
valid for the N thousand enterprises that can reasonably expect to get
a PI prefix but nothing for the N million others that may wish to serve
up content *and* be multihomed.

   Brian
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email