Subject: Re: Multihoming Issues

From: Scott Bradner <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 17:51:01 -0400 (EDT)

> Whereas today the RIRs
> hand out relatively short prefixes with a view to forcing the use of NATs
> in edge networks,

in case anyone is interested in facts on this topic

http://www.arin.net/statistics/images/perc_granted.jpg

Scott

---

From: "Mr. James W. Laferriere" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 19:56:25 -0400 (EDT)

Hello Scott ,  A little more definition to the picture would be
	nice .  Tia ,  JImL

> http://www.arin.net/statistics/images/perc_granted.jpg
       +------------------------------------------------------------------+
       | James   W.   Laferriere | System    Techniques | Give me VMS     |
       | Network        Engineer |     P.O. Box 854     |  Give me Linux  |
       | [email-masked] | Coudersport PA 16915 |   only  on  AXP |
       +------------------------------------------------------------------+

---

From: "Caitlin Bestler" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2002 07:56:09 -0500

> Hello Scott ,  A little more definition to the picture would be

The potential mismatch between IPv6 and classic DNS is that
an IPv6 unicast address is structured in two parts: the network
identifier (the high 64 bits) and an Interface ID (the low 64 bits).

Half of the Interface IDs are globally unique, the other half are
assigned locally within the network.

For the half that are globally unique, a query system could be defined
to look up that address and return the network(s) where it was found.
Even if it is a local identifier, if the host network is known by multiple
network identifiers the interface id would still be the same across all
of the possible identities. (There may be a loophole there, but that
is clearly the intent of the spec.) Again, a directory service could
optimize its representation of the data to take advantage of these
correlations.

If such optimizations are done, the question remains of whether they should
be part of the DNS service. The "non-optimizing" solution minimizes the code
impact and encourages early support for IPv6 on networks that remain
primarily IPv4.

In my opinion, any optimizations are best left until after a measurable
problem is starting to develop and mobile IP solutions are fully deployed,
as that the solution is likely to overlap with mobile support.