[ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv6 Assignment Guidelines

Michael K. Smith - Adhost mksmith at adhost.com
Mon Aug 20 13:32:45 EDT 2007

> Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv6 Assignment Guidelines
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 06:42:41PM -0700, David Conrad wrote:
> {long counter point elided}
> >
> > The real problem isn't IPv6 address exhaustion, it is the risk of
> > overwhelming the routing system.  I would worry that allocating
> > longer prefixes under the theory that it is less wasteful of address
> > space might increase the chances that those longer prefixes would
> > show up in the routing system.
> >
> > Regards,
> > -drc
> 	risk of overwhelming the routing system? guess i have to
> 	agree w/ you there... but surely its not a risk but a dead
> 	certainty.
> 	the routing system is "dead man walking" with regard to
> 	IPv6. some kind soul pointed out the magnitude of 128 bits...
> 	any of the current delegation metrics for which IPv6 is
> 	handed out, the current routing system will fail.
I couldn't agree more, but it seems to me that this is a technology
problem, not a policy problem.  If we are attempting to write policy to
adjust the size of the global routing table then I think those policy
decisions are misplaced.  



More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list