[address-policy-wg] scaling # of prefixes Re: Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call

On Tue, 4 Oct 2011, Turchanyi Geza wrote:

> Let's clarify first: roughly how many router cards MUST be upgraded if 
> the typical 0,5M limit reached (counting twice en IPv6 enty).
>
> In parallel, we should better understand the slow-down consequences as 
> well.

While I agree with you, this is way too late, and people don't generally 
care about this cost (at least not officially). RIPE is disconnected from 
routing, and the routing subsystem is not something people generally care 
about in this policy wg (my opinion).

RIPE hands out addresses, they do not do routing.

So let's make the IPv6 PI policy the same as IPv4 (remove multihoming) and 
then we monitor growth. When it hits 100k IPv6 PI (or some other number) 
prefixes, let's review again.

My dystopian view is that this won't be fixed but instead vendors will 
have to create routers that can handle many million of routes in the next 
decades. This will cost a lot of money, but that might still be cheaper 
than trying to get smaller ISPs and enterprise to aquire and handle 
renumbering mechanisms that haven't even been developed yet.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se