[ipv6-wg] Maximum acceptable IPv6 prefix in BGP table?
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Maximum acceptable IPv6 prefix in BGP table?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Maximum acceptable IPv6 prefix in BGP table?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mark Tinka
mark.tinka at seacom.mu
Wed Jun 15 17:44:48 CEST 2016
On 15/Jun/16 16:58, Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN wrote: > Hi, > > The damage potential of accepting "up to /29 from 3 distinct /8" is > huge. Please remember that one single /8 can contain up to 2 millions > /29. If today's count of "/25 up to /29" is still quite low, this would > open the way to hell on transfer market (which is self-limiting to /24), > with possibility to go into "portable adresses" land (like in phone > number portability). Exactly my reluctance to be liberal with anything longer than a /24 for IPv4. The FIB penalty has the potential to be huge. Mark.
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Maximum acceptable IPv6 prefix in BGP table?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Maximum acceptable IPv6 prefix in BGP table?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]