IPv6 PI allocation

[Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0]

> > * itojun at itojun.org (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino 2.0) [Thu 17 May 2007, 12:50 CEST]:
> > >hmm.  i have an RFC on it (RFC3178, Oct 2001), which uses two 
> > >provider-aggregatable prefixes from two separate ISPs for multi-homing. 
> > >with IPv6, it is a common practice for router(s) announcing multiple 
> > >prefixes, right?
> > >i hoped that RFC3178 would stop PI allocations, but at that time people 
> > >just did not get it.  i was lucky enough that the document made it 
> > >to informational RFC level.
> > 
> > RFC3178-style multihoming will create more entries in the global routing 
> > table once a network using that connects to an IXP.
> 
> 	not at all.  RFC3178 does not require ISPs to announce any specific
> 	routes (other than /29 or /32 of the ISP).

	oops, forgot it: it needs two "cabal" ISPs to have transit relationship
	with each other.

itojun