Considering the arguments from both David and Job, I would also like to express my support. With kind regards, Michiel Klaver At 06-05-2011 12:40, Job Snijders wrote:
Dear All,
I agree with removing the multi-homing requirement for IPv6 PI.
Its pretty awkward to send your customers to a competitor because to deploy IPv6 PI space he or she needs to be multi-homed. Also, rising technologies such as LISP allow end-users to be multi-homed in a way that is transparent to the DFZ, so why bother restricting people to BGP multi-homing.
Kind regards,
Job Snijders
At 06-05-2011 12:28, David Monosov wrote:
Dear address-policy-wg,
I would like to express my support for this policy proposal.
The promise of auto-configuration making transitioning between v6 prefixes seamless is not yet fully delivered, and eliminating the manual renumbering overhead when moving between service providers, as well as having a clear path to multihoming ("just add ASN") should assure a lively Internet services market for years to come.
-- Respectfully yours,
David Monosov