Hi, On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 10:28:18AM +0200, Remco van Mook wrote:
I think you¹re still missing the point that some of us are trying to make. I simply don¹t think that the proposal is a good way of solving the problem (which is apparently part of a sentence in current policy). Adding a second /32 to the global routing table has just as much impact as splitting up a /32 in 2 /33s so there¹s no gain there.
Mmmh, it's actually more than this. If you are a large multinational ISP, and run separate networks, these different networks might have completely different addressing needs, and growth rates. So one country network might be perfectly happy with a /35, another might need a /33, and a third one might grow into a /29 over time... Splitting a single /32 into something that has no potential for individual growth is likely to lead to more fragmentation and *more* routes in the medium run. (Of course, some other networks know their size perfectly well, and know that they will not grow much - like a NREN that serves universities that bring their own address space, so the NREN will likely be happy forever with a /48 for their infrastructure... (and *could* use PI for that) ) Gert Doering -- APWG chair -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 128645 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279