classful routes redux

Thu Nov 3 22:39:55 UTC 2005

On Nov 3, 2005, at 4:34 PM, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:

> 	saving the poor routing table is a laudable and worthwhile goal,
> 	but dumping the excess into the edges, "just cause its easy" strikes
> 	me as lame.  a routing table slot is a slot is a slot.  It holds
> 	a /96 as well as a /32 as well as a /112.  If we are going to ditch
> 	"microassignments" (and boy is that term an oxymoron) then we should
> 	also dump "one-size-fits-all" and really and truely give folks what
> 	they need.  RIRs have -never- assured the routablity of delegations.

Disagree.

The one saving grace I can see of v6 is that there is enough space to  
give everyone the space they need in a single allocation.

It's not a waste if it keeps people from needing a second block.

Maybe not everyone needs a /32, but let's not get stingy with  
plentiful resources (IP space in v6) and risk using too much of a not- 
so-plentiful resource (routing table slot).

-- 
TTFN,
patrick