Re: IPv6 will never fly: ARIN continues to kill it

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Sep 13, 2007, at 9:04 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:

Marshall,

I do not really agree with this. First, the routing tables do not care
if you have PI or PA space, just whether
it is announced or not. If you are already announcing PA space, and
getting into the DFZ, it does not harm the tables if you change to PI
space.

Sure. But I understood Michael has nothing now, so from his
point of view its a question of getting either PI from ARIN or
PA from his provider.

Second, one of reasons I helped to write and push through ARIN 2002-3
(micro assignments) was that I felt that small multi-homers (i.e.,
enterprises that were multi-homed but did not need large address
allocations) did not constitute a threat to the routing tables, and
that has been borne out by experience. Neither the growth nor the
bloat in the routing tables is being driven by small multi-homers.
This has been discussed at great length on ARIN PPML and other lists.

Yes, I gave numbers to Vince Fuller about millions of multi-homers,
but that was to set an upper bound on the process. I do no believe
that every small business will rush out and multi-home, no matter how
automated BGP becomes. The small businesses that I know that
multi-home (mostly high traffic volume companies providing network
services, such as video streaming) have a business need to do so, and
it is not realistic nor in my opinion proper to assume that they will
not be able to do so, one way or the other.

Ok, I stand corrected. I did not realize this option was
available to the smaller entities. (But is that for IPv4,
or does it apply to IPv6, too?)

That was 2005-1, which was also adopted. It's not quite the same, but close.

Regards
Marshall


    There is ongoing work to try to design a better
    routing system that would be capable of keeping
    tens of millions of prefixes or more, in the IRTF.
    If and when that work succeeds, it would be possible
    to allocate everyone their own PI prefix. We are
    not there yet.

In any case, FWIW, I think it would make sense for RIR
address allocation rules to allow IPv6-only operations
and not just those that need both IPv4 and IPv6 address
space.

I fully agree here. In fact, I would say that IPv6 will have truly
succeeded when business requests start coming in
that do _not_ want IPv4 space. This should be encouraged, not
discouraged.

Yep.

Jari




_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]