BBC does IPv6 ;) (Was: large multi-site enterprises and PI

Sun Nov 28 04:20:57 UTC 2004

On Sat, Nov 27, 2004 at 10:04:08PM -0500, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> I find it interesting that no operators are screaming that there will be
> too many routes, but that all the IPv6 researchers are bringing forth
> this view.

ACK. All the "oh our IPv4 DFZ table explodes today" is similarily
unfounded as far as I'm aware. I have not heard of anybody being
able to crystal-ball the scaling limits of BGP4 yet, and currently
used BGP implementations seem to cope quite well with 150k routes
(set aside the notorious vendor C artificial RAM limits in older gear
to make you buy new gear when table gets bigger).

> 8 years too late guys.  We've figured out table management.

ACK, looks like that.

And even if all active ASses would immediately adopt IPv6, we would
land at about 18k IPv6 routes. "big deal".

And I don't see multihoming adoption in IPv6 being anywhere quicker
than in IPv4, so: where is the problem, please? We'll have about 1
route per ASN... so even when exhausting the 16bit ASN space, this
will be only <65k routes. And when will this be, extrapolating active
ASN growth? 2010? 2015?

Call me a retarded idiot, but I have a really hard time seeing any
_practicle_ problem with "1 ASN == 1 IPv6 prefix" at all.

Regards,
Daniel

-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr at cluenet.de -- dr at IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0