IPv6 woes - RFC

Bjørn Mork bjorn at mork.no
Thu Sep 23 08:24:08 UTC 2021


Masataka Ohta <mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> writes:

> That IPv6 will be disaggregated into /40 or even /32 is disastrous.

It won't.

No ISPs will deaggregate anything.

Some multi-site enterprises might assign a /48 per remote site from
their single prefix, and want those /48s routed via some transit peers.
But this does not imply that their prefix is split into the maximum
number of /48s. The number of routes is limited to the number of
separate network sites.  There is no need to worry about this number
ever exceeding the number of IPv4 prefixes.

And those /48s will most likely be filtered out of the global table
forever.  Enterprises wanting such a configuration will depend on
special transit agreements to carry and aggregate them for the rest of
the world.  This is not a problem.

There are real issues with dual-stack, as this thread started out with.
I don't think there is a need neither to invent IPv6 problems, nor to
promote IPv6 advantages.  What we need is a way out of dual-stack-hell.





Bjørn


More information about the NANOG mailing list