[ppml] 2005-1 status

[Tom Vest]

On Jan 23, 2006, at 6:20 PM, Geoff Huston wrote:

> At 08:18 AM 24/01/2006, Daniel Golding wrote:
>
>> That is proof by assertion. The routing table has grown relatively  
>> slowly,
>
> Relative to what?
>
>> and there is NO reason to think it will grow faster under IPv6.
>
> Given that there are few natural constraints to routing table bloat  
> other
> than an advanced state of social consciousness, the drivers for IPv6
> routing table bloat appear to include a vastly larger end device  
> population
> and a commodity utility provider structure that cares little about  
> spending
> time (and money) to take measures to avoid routing table expansion.
> That would appear to constitute grounds for thinking that, yes,
> there is a distinct risk of IPv6 route table bloat at levels greater
> than we've seen in IPv4.

There is another factor also. ASes have now been implicitly adopted  
as a pricing factor for interconnection, in a way that could  
contribute to inflated demand for ASNs relative to the current demand  
drivers/trend. To the extent that ASN proliferation correlates with  
routing table bloat, and there are no new countervailing factors, we  
could be facing a new routing table growth dynamic altogether.

c.f.,

> http://global.mci.com/uunet/peering/

redubbed today as:

http://www.verizonbusiness.com/uunet/peering/
(section 1.5)

TV