[6bone] multiple address handling

[Michel Py]

> Tim Chown wrote:
> 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?

I all depends if you consider these customers or not. Some do, some
don't, some have or will request a pTLA or become LIRs by setting up a
company that functions as an ISP.

> Of course part of the problem is the lack of progress of the
> multi6 WG, albeit a non-trivial problem to be working on :)

This is purely a political issue. If the IETF wanted multi6 to produce a
solution, multi6 would have produced one by now. Multi6 simply is in the
same batch as ngtrans, the 6bone and other stuff that has been closed,
is being closed or is slated to be closed soon.

> 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.

There are multiple issues associated with doing this. It is acceptable
for a home/soho setup, but there are not too many people that are
willing to run a large setup with this, especially in the total absence
of standards.

Michel.