[ppml] And as for assignments...
jonathan at qx.net
Sat Aug 25 11:33:36 EDT 2007
And to create a little controversy...
For an additional 2 cents... a /46, /52, /64 - all of these are
excessive for a home user. Our core router can handle 1,000,000 IPv4,
and 500,000 IPv6 routes - and that's with today's technology. Our 7613
need not see all the routes we distribute to our DSL / Wireless
customers. Those can / will be aggregated into blocks before they hit
the core.. just as our aggregation routers don't see any public BGP
routes. From there we'll aggregate again into our /32 prefix 2607:F100
- which is how the global Internet will see us. We'll probably end up
assigning /120s to individual homes, where subnetting is likely to never
occur, and multi-homing isn't a realistic possibility. I know with my
current DirecTV, XBOX, PS3, Vista Media Centers at home all
participating on my network, they do not like being in separate subnets.
Everything is happiest when they do not need to go through any sort of
routing appliance to get to each other. A single block of 256 addreses -
that'd put every device in my house in a nice discrete container, and
still let me add in my refrigerator, oven, lamps, water heater - what
ever you'd actually want to assign an address to.
That being said, even if people could assign v6 to every device in their
home... Would you really want to? Do people really need to know or care
that their water heater is currently on or off? Wouldn't it be a nice
surprise to find that overnight, their water heater had been hacked -
and it was now set to 'off' just before their morning shower?
Personally, despite being a huge technophile who loves to use SNMP to
graph power consumption, temperature, humidity... I really don't think I
want my water heater on publicly addressable space.
Assigning a /64 to a home... or 2^64th addresses... which is the number
of IPv4 addreses available on the Internet today - SQUARED... Surely I'm
not the only person who thinks that's just crazy. I understand the
desire to decrease the number of routes. I can see if you have a just a
regular Cisco sup720 you're probably worried about the health of your
hardware due to the 256,000 IPv4 route limit - and the fact that we have
224,966 global BGP routes at the moment. But... isn't the best answer to
upgrade the hardware that's causing the limit, rather than implementing
a company-wide policy that will be deliberately wasteful forever? It's a
whole lot easier to change out a supervisor card, and upgrade some
aggregation routers, than to get all your customers to renumber because
one day ARIN may realize that 2^64 addresses for a residence is a highly
wasteful use of resources, and decides to deny an ISP's request to add
Having said all that - This e-mail has a definitely different take on
the issue from most all the e-mails I've read.
My question is - What is wrong with my logic, in that most people who
are commenting don't think in these terms?
More information about the ARIN-PPML