Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested

Tue Nov 9 01:40:43 UTC 2004

> 	2) There is a cost associated with assigning globally-unique space no
> matter how you do it. This cost could be too high for some application --
> RFC-1918-style space is free.

you want unique space but not pay for the administration
of it.  absolutely brilliant.

> 	3) There is a concern that some recipients of this globally-unique
> unroutable space might use political pressure to get that space routed. This
> could potentially lead to an explosion of the number of routes in the global
> table.

look, there are two camps

  o v6 space is effectively infinite and the routing table can
    handle 500k entries easy

  o v6 space is kinda small (sure wish they had done variable
    length), and we should worry about the routing table

in the first case, let them eat cake and to hell with all this
yakking.

in the latter case, withdraw the allocations of golden space to
special services, stop allocating monsterous /48s to ethernets
when we know layer-2 does not scale, stop giving /32s to anyone
who asks (or whatever the fashionable prefix of the week is, i
can't keep track), etc.

either this thing is big enough and gonna scale, or send the
turkey back to the drawing boards.

but don't add already well-known disasters on top of something
in which you have insufficient faith to trust to scale well.

randy