multihoming

[Bill Manning]

% You are missing the point, IMHO. Granted, a /48 per provider is not the
% most efficient allocation, but please keep in mind that there is an
% almost unlimited number of /48s. There is more than enough room in the
% 2000:3FFF space to give multiple /48s to each living person on earth,
% and also enough space to give multiple /64s to each light bulb in use.

	How many /64s does each lightbulb get?
	One per manufacture?
	One per consumer?
	One per utility?
	One per neighborhood association?
	One per research project that wants to check on:
		(features of glass, filament degredation, market penetration...)

	Or are you making the tacit assumption that everyone 
	gets enough space to address all the things that are of
	interest to them, with their OWN block of v6 space?

	IMHO, the whole point of CIDR in v4 was to address TWO
	problems, first, address exaustion. Delegation policies
	were increasingly finetuned to only delegate as much space 
	as was really needed.  second, a constraint on routing table
	size.  

% On the other end, there are practical limits to the size of the routing
% table, end even if we had unlimited CPU, memory and bandwidth resources
% it would become a manageability issue anyway.

	Granted, routing protocols of today are not robust in
	dealing with IPv6.  It does not mean that we should hammer
	IPv6 into the IPv4 mold nor should you restrict your thinking 
	to using v4 routing protocols for v6 address space.
	
	Neither the delegation problems nor the routing problems 
	are tractable with current thinking.  Hierarchical 
	delegation/routing, while known to work, do not meet the 
	wants of the user populace.  They will find a way around
	what they perceive as impediments. 

% Michel.

--bill