Re: [sig-policy] prop-101-v002: Removing multihoming , requirement for I
On Feb 27, 2012, at 10:52 PM, Terence Zhang YH wrote:
>
>> The multihoming requirement is an artifact of IPv4 scarcity and should
>> not remain as a hurdle to IPv6 deployment in the enterprise.
>
> I don't think the multihoming requirement is because of IPv4 scarcity,
> I believe the intend of the existing assignment criterias is to encourage
> using LIR addresses when feasible, trying to minimize the global routing
> prefixes increase due to the use of portable assignments.
>
> Regards
> Terence Zhang
> CNNIC
While I think you are correct, the IPv4 routing table bloat is also an artifact of
IPv4 scarcity to a large extent and should not be as much of an issue in IPv6
even with organizations getting PI prefixes.
RIR cost in the APNIC region is probably a sufficient deterrent for this going
forward.
Owen