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] PI vs PA in routing table
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI vs PA in routing table
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI vs PA in routing table
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Tue Sep 19 14:07:19 CEST 2006
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 03:41:06PM +0000, Max Tulyev wrote:
> Maybe there is no real "route table PI pollution" trouble in the real world?
Currently, there are much more PA entries than PI - but the problem that
I see is that the PI growth rate is much higher than PA, and as such,
"unlimited PI" might rise to be a problem.
Nobody is proposing to disallow PI.
Just balance "cost" vs. "convenience" a little bit better.
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 94488
SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster at Space.Net
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0
D- 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-234
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI vs PA in routing table
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI vs PA in routing table
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]