Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote: > > >>> a billion /48 prefixes in the global routing table, what do > >>> you call this? I call it IPv6 swamp. > > > >> Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote: > >> It is! No question, but do you want to wait 5+ years? > > > > You are missing the point. If we had a reasonable expectation that a > > scalable flat routing protocol would be available in 5 years, I would > > buy the argument. But what do we have today? Zero, not even a > > believable > > promise. > > But you think that we will have a billion multihomed networks in five > years so we need to go for someting really complicated that we have no > experience with? > > > This is why I used the term "gambling" before. What you are lobbying > > for > > is to say that it is OK to give away PI and create the IPv6 swamp > > yes.
I disagree. If our goal (as it should be) is a 10 billion node network (at least) then the risks in allowing even the beginning of a swamp are too great. Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
