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/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] article about IPv6 vs firewalls vs NAT in arstechnica (seen on slashdot)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] article about IPv6 vs firewalls vs NAT in arstechnica (seen on slashdot)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] article about IPv6 vs firewalls vs NAT in arstechnica (seen on slashdot)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet
Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at
Tue May 15 09:24:42 CEST 2007
Tony Hain wrote: > Owen DeLong wrote: > >>...... [...] > > The noise about PI blowing out the routing system is just that, -noise-. If > all ~20k AS entities came and demanded PI space we would have a whopping 20k > routing entries in the IPv6 DFZ BGP mesh. At 1/10th the IPv4 table, and > basically stable vs. growing at a compound rate, that is not even > noticeable. I have long since stopped listening to *that* "-noise-" as you put it. > Tony I am prepared to start listening again as soon as the "Gain"-figures in the CIDR report start to change dramatically: --- 11May07 --- ASnum NetsNow NetsAggr NetGain % Gain Description Table 217147 140280 76867 35.4% All ASes Wilfried.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] article about IPv6 vs firewalls vs NAT in arstechnica (seen on slashdot)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] article about IPv6 vs firewalls vs NAT in arstechnica (seen on slashdot)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]