Re: [ipv6-wg@localhost] Re: [lir-wg] IXP networks routing
- Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 13:29:22 +0100
--On Tuesday, March 04, 2003 16:14:57 +0100 Poul-Henning Kamp
phk@localhost wrote:
> I'm mainly talking about the lack of a feasible way for end-customers
> to get working multi-homing. This ties directly into the "PI" space
> question.
Multihoming today depends on the possession of an AS number. I see no
alternative to that prerequisite.
Size of current v4 routing table: roughly 120000 entries
Number of ASen visible : roughly 15000
So, if we simply give every AS number holder currently present in the v4
table a /32 or so, with STRICT instructions to forget getting another
prefix until half that prefix is pingable, we attain several things:
* This makes the PI/PA distinction moot, or rather, we have PI only.
Perhaps the mootness is temporary, but I hope not. It might be
replaced with AA -- AS Allocated, ie "these addresses belong to AS1653,
and cannot be placed under any other AS".
* The "v6 for services" problem will disappear. End of this discussion.
* The routing table will shrink to 12.5% of its present size.
* We will have a minor chunk of v6 space used, and all present users of
v4 will be able to migrate without lack of address space.
* If the number of ASen (with one /32 per AS) visible in the v6 table
increase 100% compared to todays v4 figures, the table will still be only
25% of today.
* Everybody will hunt me with both sharp and blunt objects for being
a filthy pragmatic person with blasphemous opinions.
Now, please tell me why this does not work. Purity reasons will have no
effect, for I am too shortsighted.
--
Måns Nilsson Systems Specialist
+46 70 681 7204 KTHNOC MN1334-RIPE
We're sysadmins. To us, data is a protocol-overhead.
Attachment:
pgp00001.pgp
Description: PGP signature
|