[6bone] pTLA request NDSOFTWARE - review closes 23 October 2002

[Tim Chown]

On Sun, Oct 20, 2002 at 01:52:17PM +0200, Nicolas DEFFAYET wrote:
> 
> A lot of peers filter our /32 because it's not a pTLA. 
> We want a pTLA for can announce without any problems our network, don't
> break the IPv6 aggregation and be independant of a upstream (we don't
> want be down because our upstream is down). 

The danger is that all companies will want this independence and for the
same reason demand a pTLA/SubTLA.  It's certainly true for our university,
which has a /48.  Given we offer IPv6 remote access, should we be allowed
a /32 to offer static /48 "site" IPv6 prefixes to any university member 
wanting connectivity?

Of course part of the problem is the lack of progress of the multi6 WG,
albeit a non-trivial problem to be working on :)   The "classic" IPv6
solution for our university is to take two /48's from different providers,
and for all clients to have two global addresses, but the client-side
support for handling the multiple addressing is yet to be resolved.

Tim