[ppml] alternative realities (was PIv6 for legacy holders (/wRSA + efficient use))
sleibrand at internap.com
Wed Aug 1 19:30:28 EDT 2007
Paul Vixie wrote:
> if it's a bad thing, then is there also policy work to be done about it?
I'm not sure a hammer is needed here, as I'm not sure this is a nail.
Let's say that a legacy /8 holder like MIT decides to start leasing out
their IP space to "customers" buying a tunnel, dial-up, or some other
similar form of connectivity. Let's say there is sufficient demand for
IP space that they sign up a number of customers, each receiving a /24
with their tunnel and announcing it in BGP to their upstreams. Now
let's say this kind of behavior causes the routing table to explode. If
I'm a DFZ operator who is no longer able to handle all these prefixes,
my solution is pretty simple: stop accepting /24's carved up out of /8
allocations. Doing so would cause me to send traffic to MIT's customers
via the MIT /8. That in turn would either mean that the traffic would
hit MIT's network and then get sent to MIT's customers via their tunnel,
or it would hit an intermediate network that was listening to the
more-specific /24 announcement from MIT's customers (probably because
they're being paid to do so), who would in turn send the traffic along
In summary, I'm sure this kind of thing will happen as we exhaust the
IPv4 free pool, but I'm not sure it will break things too badly.
More information about the ARIN-PPML