[ppml] Policy Proposal 2005-1: Provider-independent IPv6
On Thu, 27 Apr 2006, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> > > As others have mentioned, historically temporary solutions aren't. I
> > > believe that we are making the same mistakes as we did when v4 was first
> > > rolled out with a /48 out of a reserved /44 per PI request. How large is
> > > this PI swamp that is being proposed?
> I think I agree with Aaron here, they just won't ever come back...
> there are legacy /24's assigned that no one can recover today. there
> will be 'legacy' /48's (or 44's or whatever the decision on size is)
> assigned tomorrow and never recovered.
The routes in the Internet routing table will likely be more specific than
a /48 assuming people want to slice and dice their aggregate to do traffic
engineering... I haven't done a study to see how many slices people
typically need. One way to look at it is to consider that since /56s are
assigned to soho then maybe this makes the /56 the new /24, and providers
will allow more specifics upto /56. In other words, small sites will have
just enough PA space to take up one slot in the Internet routing table and
make multihoming work.
Jason Schiller (703)886.6648
Senior Internet Network Engineer fax:(703)886.0512
Public IP Global Network Engineering schiller at uu.net
UUNET / Verizon jason.schiller at verizonbusiness.com
The good news about having an email address that is twice as long is that
it increases traffic on the Internet.