[address-policy-wg] Source of routing table growth

On Fri, 1 Jul 2011, Sascha Lenz wrote:

> You are in the IT business and you really think about 30+ years from 
> now? Rather sounds like a science fiction author to me :-)

Yes, I do. I consider that a responsible approach. IPv4 lasted ~30 years 
before it ran into serious problems, I want IPv6 to last a lot longer. I 
also want it to scale so everybody can use it.

> This wasn't a real problem in the IPv4 world, i really doubt that is an 
> immanent problem in the IPv6 world if the policies are identical; by 
> design, most entities will have a single prefix (or per site worst case) 
> and stay with that for most of their days.

Yes, but the problem is if everybody (or even 1%) in the world wants to 
multihome, then it doesn't scale.

> I'm not sure why there should be a higher IPv6 "PI" usage rate than for 
> IPv4.

Because more and more people (and companies) are adopting Internet usage 
and in 20-30 years time the demand for multihoming is most likely going to 
substantially higher than today.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se