[ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv6 Assignment Guidelines

Ted Mittelstaedt tedm at ipinc.net
Mon Aug 20 16:35:07 EDT 2007

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of
>bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
>Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 3:24 AM
>To: David Conrad
>Cc: ppml at arin.net
>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.

Why?  Does introducing IPv6 create billions of extra hosts that
need to have IP numbers assigned?


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list