<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><blockquote type="cite"><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#000000"><br></font><blockquote type="cite">There is no such thing as "PI for everyone" in the foreseeable future.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"> <br></blockquote><br>If by "everyone" you mean "every organization with a single-homed network", then I agree, that will be infeasible at least as long as we're running BGP4. But as long as we move the bar gradually, I think we can safely move toward a situation where PI addresses are generally available for multihomed organizations who are willing to pay their providers enough to run BGP.<br></div></blockquote></div><br><div>BGP is not the driving deficiency in this situation. Indeed, we could switch to locator-based</div><div>forwarding in the IDR realm without actually changing BGP. We will, however, need to</div><div>change the packet header to at least include a destination IDR Locator (such as adding</div><div>a 32-bit field for the destination ASN).</div><div><br></div><div>BGP4 contains a superset of the required FIB information for this, so, the protocol is</div><div>not the major limitation there.</div><div><br></div><div>BGP does run into other scaling limits (churn rates, etc.) which do scale somewhat with</div><div>prefix distribution, but, I don't think that would outpace moore's law if we were able to</div><div>do FIB lookups in TCAM based on dest-AS instead of prefix.</div><div><br></div><div>Owen</div><div><br></div></body></html>