On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Sascha Lenz
<slz@baycix.de> wrote:
Hi,
[...]
why do you expect a "sudden spike"? You know, IPv6 adoption is painfully slow.
And actually, that's one of the points why some (most?) support the proposal, to speed that up!
Not the IPv4 PI address space holders create the real problems...
So, i'm a little confused now why this is bad.
I don't know if this few (yes, it's "few" for me) more IPv6 prefixes will cause any problems at all,
or if bugs are trigged, no one knows. We'll have to see, or someone might want to write a paper about it indeed :-)
And why should THIS be a money issue? If you don't plan for 20k IPv6 prefixes when buying new border routers nowadays, what the hell are you doing?
And what "border-router-grade" hardware doesn't support this few prefixes?
I'm FAR more concerned about IPv4 table growth/deaggregation after exhaustion...
We are concerned as well! However, the two tables share the same phisical memory!