Poul-Henning Kamp;
I have been monitoring IPv6 for exactly this point: how do IPv6 propose to give people redundancy/ressilience.
So far I have not seen anybody really say "this is how it should be done".
draft-ohta-e2e-multihoming-00.txt is dated April 2000. And, now, there even is a multi6 WG of IETF.
The best I have been able to gather is that it is expected that end customers assign multiple IP# to their servers and leave the selection to the DNS and the other end. I don't know if the "anycast" idea was part of this solution but right now I certainly don't see any other solution than DNS.
My current advice to my customers are therefore: Multiple IP# per server, use DNS for load-balancing.
The problem is that load-balancing is not a reason for multi-homing. With the same amount of payment, you should be able to get more bandwidth from a single ISP (bulk discount) than from multiple ISPs that there is no need for load-balancing. Masataka Ohta