[routing-wg] IPv6 Routing Recommendations

> 
> Studying the IPv4 routing table may lead us to a potential number of
> more specific routes, but would it lead us to any conclusions about
> their length?  The Swiss example shows that the routes may not be
> subdivided from the most significant bits of the prefixes, so how do we
> do the analysis?

(Alas, I will not be making ap-wg, so here is something to think about)...

I think, in order to come up with a normal figure, we need to normalise the
data as best we can. Taking the average number of deaggregates per v4
allocation size should give us an idea of how much people may want to
deaggregate their v6 allocation (which in this region is likely to be /32),

Am in full acceptance of the fact that some people deaggregate for either
other TE reasons (e.g high localpref and lack of community support by
expensive upstream) or no good reason at all (i.e ignorance / assumptions
about the way the internet works)

This could lead us back to the /36 choice if , for instance, we found that
on average there four v4 deaggregates (since deaggregating the standard v6
allocation of /32 to 4 deaggregates produces this).

However, I do feel we need a model more comprehensive than this, I'd like to
see not only a maximum length, but for this to be applied proportionately to
the size of the allocation, I'm not comfortable allowing bigger folk to
pollute by allowing them to deaggregate a larger allocation up to a fixed
deaggregate size.


Dave.


> 
> Remember, if this is to be a WG document, I'd like to attempt to reach
> consensus in the group (and I suspected that would never be easy), so
> all input is welcome!
> 
> Looking forward to an interesting 20 minute discussion in Prague,
> Rob
> 


------------------------------------------------
David Freedman 
Group Network Engineering
Claranet Limited
http://www.clara.net