> I thought that routes in the IPv6 DFZ were not supposed to be more > specific than /32. Yes, another of the great myths. That somehow all IPv6 addresses would be PAs, only ISPs would have them, and everyone would route on the default ISP allocations (/32). Great idea in theory (if all you care about is keeping route tables small), unworkable in practice if you look at the demands of the real world (i.e., the last 15 years of IPv4). Take a look at draft-narten-radir-problem-statement-00.txt, as it talks quite a bit about the realities that lead to lots of routing table entries. The pressures to deaggregate /32s in IPv6 are fundamentally the same as the pressures that lead to deaggration in IPv4. Thomas _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf