Hi, On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 02:07:14PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
Conservation is NOT an issue for IPv6 (and this hasn't anything to do with conservation at all anyway, it's "aggregation").
so far, v6 gives us no zero in routing or aggregation. it does give us more bits with which we can, if we are not careful, create much bigger routing problem.
Which is one of the reasons why I'm strictly against IPv6 PI. IPv4 PI nowadays is far too cheap, at least in RIPE land (just go and bug your favourite LIR enough so they send the request to RIPE). Becoming a LIR (again, speaking for RIPE land only) *is* a hurle - it's paperwork, and it costs *recurring* money. Then, in addition to that, cheating to match the criteria, is another hurdle. I do not say that there won't be anyone doing this - but I am fairly sure it *will* reduce the number of "pseudo-PI-for-multihoming" prefixes we'll see. Of course, the consequence of "we do not want to make people go and get a /32 if they are really end customers" and the lack of working other multihoming solutions today is that we might want to get acquainted to the thought of /48s from LIR-/32s being visible in "the table". At least "regionally", like "two AS hops away from the originating AS", or something like this. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 45114 (45077) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299