Re: [address-policy-wg] Revised 2006-01 set back to Discussion Phase (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)

Nick Hilliard wrote:

- while a requirement for multihoming is useful, it should be made clear during implementation that this is not necessarily a requirement for multihoming using ASNs and BGP on the public Internet (however we care to define that term). Private interconnection to third parties is also a fully legitimate justification for assignment of provider independent number resources.

I also saw a lot of cases when PI announced via upstream's ASN, not via user's one. I think, it is OK and it is not against multihoming, as this ASN is multihomed of course. -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253@FIDO)