This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it lessdestructive
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it lessdestructive
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it lessdestructive
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com
Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com
Mon Apr 24 13:24:32 CEST 2006
> > You do realize that in IPv6 there is enough address space > > to supply such a "land rush" in an orderly manner so that > > everyone gets their unique PI block? > > The problem is not the amount of address space. The problem is the > pressure on the AS numbers, and the amount of slots in the global > routing table. Which, as a matter of fact, won't be able to handle > "an unique PI block for everyone" (5 billion?) any time soon. That is precisely why I am promoting the concept of geo-topo addressing. This solves global routing table problem by using roughly 5000 routes for city-based aggregates to serve millions of PI address blocks. And it can be done with no new protocols, no new technology and no changes to the existing PA address regime for ISPs which want to stick with pure classic PA addresses. Only ISPs which want to offer services to geo-topo address holders will need to make adjustments to their internal practices. --Michael Dillon
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it lessdestructive
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it lessdestructive
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]