Getting a "portable" /19 or /20

Greg Maxwell gmaxwell at
Tue Apr 10 12:54:36 UTC 2001

On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Adrian Chadd wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 10, 2001, Greg Maxwell wrote:
> > The reason they don't allocate /24's is because without aggregation the
> > Internet is not scalable. Perhaps they are being too agressive, but the
> > reasoning is sound.
> s/not/less/

No. s/less/not/. Aggregation is a core requirement. Without *any*
aggregation we would have a global route for every single host, this would
obviously not work.

Aggregation is a requirement, beyond that all that differs is where you
draw the line.

/24 minimum aggregation was acceptable 20 years ago. It is not acceptable
today, as made obvious by the routing policies of many networks.

There really isn't a solution to this struggle between the desire to
multihome and the need to aggregate on today's IPv4 Internet. Which is why
I've been participating on the multi6 working group to ensure that IPv6
offers a better solution (and perhaps, finally, a compelling reason for
the people here to drive the transition to IPv6).

More information about the NANOG mailing list