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/ipv6-wg@ripe.net/
[ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Re: What is a site?
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Re: What is a site?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Re: What is a site?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Mon May 9 14:55:35 CEST 2005
Hi, On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 02:50:11PM +0200, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > Fully agree with this view. > > I think if we really want to go into this direction, the HD ratio > modification seems a better idea. I actually have already thought long time > ago that we can't compare in terms of efficiency IPv4 with IPv6, so no > reason for keeping the same ratio. Why do you assume that the achievable efficiency isn't comparable? IPv6 has some bonuses ("all end-customer networks have the same size") and some drawbacks ("you need to achieve a much higher aggregation level if your internal routing system is ever going to cope with the sheer number of customer networks"), so overall efficiency "should" be similar. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 71007 (66629) 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): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Re: What is a site?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Re: What is a site?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]