Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy

[Joel Jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>]

Seth Mattinen wrote:
> Leo Bicknell wrote:
> > Worse, the problem is being made worse at an alarming rate.  MPLS
> > VPN's are quicky replacing frame relay, ATM, and leased line circuits
> > adding MPLS lables and VPN/VRF routes to edge routers.  Various
> > RIR's are pushing "PI for all" in IPv6 based on addressing availbility.
> > Some networks are actually finally using multicast for IPTV services,
> > generating much larger number of entries than the global multicast table
> > would otherwise indicate.
>
> It's not the RIR's fault. IPv6 wasn't designed with any kind of workable
> site multihoming.

Lest anyone forget it has the same non-workable site-multihoming that
has allowed the internet to grow to the size it is today. by non-working
we mean not-better than ipv4.

We actually know how to run that network pain and all.

> The only goal seems to have been to limit /32's to an
> "ISP" but screw you if you aren't one. There was no alternative and it's
> been how long now? PI, multihoming, multicast, etc. is reality because
> the internet is now Very Serious Business for many, many people.
>
> Yes, I know there's hacks like SHIM6 and I don't wish to go OT into a
> debate about them, so I'll just say that if there had been a viable
> alternative to multihoming as we know it I think it would have been
> given a go before policy got pushed to the RIR's to allow IPv6 PI.
>
> ~Seth